-
Mua’shara (Cohabitation)
Ibn Umar (ra) narrated that the Prophet (saw) said,
«كُلُّكُمْ رَاعٍ، وَكُلُّكُمْ مَسْؤولٌ عَنْ رَعِيَّتِهِ، فَالأَمِيرُ الَّذِي عَلَى النَّاسِ رَاعٍ، وَهُوَ مَسْؤولٌ عَنْ رَعِيَّتِهِ، وَالرَّجُلُ رَاعٍ عَلَى أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ، وَهُوَ مَسْؤُولٌ عَنْ رَعِيَّتِهِ، وَعَبْدُ الرَّجُلِ رَاعٍ عَلَى مَالِ سَيِّدِهِ، وَهُوَ مَسْؤُولٌ عَنْهُ، أَلاَ كُلُّكُمْ رَاعٍ، وَكُلُّكُمْ مَسْؤُولٌ عَنْ رَعِيَّتِهِ»
“All of you are guardians and are questionable for your wards. The ruler is a guardian and questionable for his subjects; the man is a guardian and questionable for his family; the woman is a guardian and is questionable for her husband’s house and his offspring, and a man’s slave is responsible for his master’s property and he is questionable for it. So each of you is a guardian and each of you is questionable for his flock.” (Agreed Upon)
This hadith holds for every human being, whether male or female, responsible for performing their obligations and undertaking necessary actions and speech in life in the best and most complete manner. And each human being will be accounted for what he does or says in his life; he will be accounted about how he carries his actions and about the status and completion of his actions. This is because the word, ‘راعٍ’ i.e. guardian, means the responsibility for actions. Just as a shepherd is responsible for managing the affairs of his flock of animals by watering, feeding and protecting them, every human being is responsible for his ward. He must manage the affairs of what is assigned upon him in the best possible way. Thus, a man is a guardian for his house, actions, society and his homeland, and a woman is a guardian for her house and the household of her husband. The human being is a guardian no matter wherever he may be. The principle of guardianship (الرعاية) is the performance of obliged actions in a complete manner.
This is the same principle for the good cohabitation (المعاشرة بالمعروف) which Allah (swt) has commanded for both the husband and wife. Thus, the principle of good cohabitation by good dealing and communication is according to what Allah (swt) has commanded regarding good cohabitation i.e. intimacy and cooperation. It is the closest, strongest and the most important bond of humankind. There is no cohabitation or relation more intimate than that of marital intimacy (العشرة الزوجيّة).
Conduct is according to the principle of accountable guardianship over men and women to perform their right of guardianship responsibly, for Allah (swt) has obliged that upon the neck of every human. By virtue of man’s obligation to take care of his wife, he must take the initiative for good companionship, whilst the woman, in return, must reciprocate, according to what Allah (swt) has obliged upon her in terms of good obedience, such that there is mutual love and good companionship between them. Thus, abiding to the obligations and responsibilities (as indicated by the hadith) ‘All of you are guardians’ necessitates good treatment and complete companionship between the spouses.
Allah (swt) has commanded man specifically by saying,
وَعَاشِرُوهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ فَإِنْ كَرِهْتُمُوهُنَّ فَعَسَى أَنْ تَكْرَهُوا شَيْئًا وَيَجْعَلَ اللَّهُ فِيهِ خَيْرًا كَثِيرًا
“And Consort with them (عَاشِرُوهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ) with goodness. For if you dislike them – perhaps you dislike a thing and Allah makes therein much good.” [TMQ Surah Nisa 4:19]. Thus, good cohabitation (المعاشرة بالمعروف) is an obligation, even if he hates the ugliness or the aging or the sickness or the poverty or the repulsive habits of his wife, excluding the illicit conduct or the commitment of indecency. Co-living and cohabitation with goodness is an obligation, just as hatred is not the cause (sabab) for bad cohabitation. Instead, the cause for ending good cohabitation is only illicit conduct i.e. disobedience and commitment of indecency such as the wife’s raising her voice against her husband, abusive words, rudeness in deeds and speech. These alone can be the justification to admonish, separate from and beat her lightly. If she insists on her illicit conduct and indecency, she is divorced. Otherwise, it is absolutely not permissible to treat her badly (سوء عشرة), particularly since having good cohabitation with her is a rewardable deed.
Sometimes, what man hates in a woman may have goodness which is known by Allah (swt) alone. Indeed, perhaps you may hate a thing and it is good for you. The Prophet (saw) said in a Sahih Hadith reported by Abu Huraira (ra), «لا يفرَك مؤمنٌ مؤمنةً إن سخِطَ منْها خُلقًا رضِيَ منْها آخرَ» “A believing man should not hate a believing woman; if he dislikes one of her characteristics, he will be pleased with another (characteristic).” (Narrated in the Tafseer of Ibn Kathir). The meaning is that man should not hate her completely and that should not make him leave her i.e. it is not correct for him. Instead, he must overlook her disliked characteristic because of her good character. He must forgo what he hates for what he loves in her.
The Messenger of Allah (saw) has urged people to have good manners and good cohabitation and made their rewards equal to the reward of charity (sadaqa). He (saw) said, «كلُّ معروفِ صدقةٌ وإنَّ من المعروفِ أن تلقَى أخاكَ بوجهٍ طلقٍ» “Every good (deed) (i.e. Ma’roof) is a charity. Indeed amongst the good deeds is to meet your brother with a smiling face.” [Tirmidhi Book 27, Hadith 76]. From this hadith, we can understand that the meaning of the word “Ma’roof” is to perform the obligation with contentment. For instance, a father asked his son to bring a cup of water, so the son brought it and kept it in front of his father’s table silently or with unease, such that his father did not notice the bringing of the water, this is still considered as fulfillment of the obligation of obeying his father. It removes the disobedience and sin. However, if the son had brought the cup of water and gave it to his father with polite words, waiting for his father to take the cup or ordered him to place it on the table, this is considered as Ma’roof (i.e. performing obligations with content).
Thus Ma’roof is beyond the obligation and is a recommended mandub, not the obligation itself i.e. the one who performs this will be rewarded and the one who leaves it will not be blamed. Mandub action raises one to a higher degree than obligation alone, as the one who is keen on performing recommended action in this world will also be keen on performing obligations. He only performs recommended actions because he realizes that there are higher ranks in Paradise and that the normal people who perform obligations alone will not attain the highest rank in Paradise. Instead, the believers who are keen on performing the obligations, followed by the recommended actions, will attain the highest degree. Performing the recommended actions elevates the soul and mind, drawing him closer to Allah (swt). It is thus that Allah (swt) will separate the people of recommended actions, who are the people of Ma’roof, from the rest of Muslims on the Day of Judgment from the very first moment. In this regard, the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: «وأوَّلُ مَن يدخُلُ الجنَّةَ أهلُ المعروفِ»“The first to enter the paradise on the Day of Judgment is Ma’roof and its people” [At-Tabaraaani Al-Mujam Al-Awsat]. Accordingly, the saying of Allah (swt):
وَعَاشِرُوهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
“Cohabitate (consort) with them with Ma’roof (goodness)” is the request (Talab) to men to exercise their right of cohabitation with their wives, taking care of them in a good manner with good characteristics in the best way. It is the incitement from Allah (swt) to his servants to attain the highest rank in Paradise. It is the incitement from Allah (swt) to elevate the level of marital conduct and care. Thus, the reward for a man who cohabitates with his wife in a good manner (i.e. with Ma’roof) surpasses many more times than the reward of a man who just cohabitates with his wife only to the extent of fulfilling obligations and duties alone.
Allah (swt) commanded man by saying:
وَعَاشِرُوهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
“Cohabitate (consort) with them (i.e. your wives) with Ma’roof (goodness)”. In another verse, Allah (swt) equates men and women over the rights of good treatment and their obligations as Allah (swt) says:
وَلَهُنَّ مِثْلُ الَّذِي عَلَيْهِنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
“And they (women) have rights similar to those (of men) over them in goodness (ma’roof)” [TMQ Surah Baqarah 2: 228].
Marriage is one amongst the tasks assigned by Allah (swt) to his servants from amongst men and women. Like every task which man encounters in his life, it is necessary to stop and study the subject of its encounter or bearing its burden to ensure its success. Indeed, the Muslim stops at every task and matter in his life to know the method which Allah (swt) has commanded to deal with that matter. Thus, a Muslim does not invent any organization or rulings for his affairs. Instead, he would search for organization and rulings from the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (saw). He would act according to them alone. Thus, knowing about the rulings of Allah (swt) in any matter which the Muslim encounters is a condition of Iman, just like the obligation to act upon the rulings of Allah (swt) is also a condition of Iman. Allah (swt) clarifies this by saying:
يَرْفَعِ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا مِنْكُمْ وَالَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْعِلْمَ دَرَجَاتٍ
“Allah will raise those who have believed among you and those who were given knowledge, by degrees” [TMQ Surah Mujadilah:11]. This is because Iman necessitates action based on the rulings, whilst the action necessitates the knowledge of the rulings. There is no Iman in Islam just by knowing the Islamic rulings, without acting upon them. Accordingly, good cohabitation between the spouses is a right from Allah (swt) to man regarding his wife. It is a right repeatedly emphasized from Allah (swt) to a woman regarding her husband.
Just as good cohabitation is a right for both spouses over one another, it is also an obligation for both over one another. So, the husband has to take the initiative to raise the level of cohabitation with his wife to the level of goodness (i.e. ma’roof) without having concern or consideration to the level at which his wife cohabitates with him. It is an obligation upon man at first and this obligation is not waived from him due to the absence of his wife’s good cohabitation with him in exchange, as it is the right and obligation upon man regarding his wife. If he performs his obligation, his sins will be absolved. If he is patient upon the absence of getting his right of goodness from his wife, he will be rewarded for his patience. This also applies to a wife who should also take the initiative to raise the level of her cohabitation with her husband to the level of goodness (i.e. ma’roof), so that she fulfills her obligation easily. The subject of her rights (over her husband) does not deter her from performing her obligation, even if she does not get her rights from her husband. If she is patient, she will be rewarded with the reward of patience just as Allah (swt) has promised for the man.
The cohabitation which Islam has commanded necessitates spouses to compete each other over performing their obligations of goodness, making their married life a competition in goodness, where each one of them increases their act of goodness over the other in order for them to be proud of many good acts on the Day of Resurrection. Thus, marriage in Islam is a way of living that is a distinct from any other way of any nation or people or religion. In this way, the condition of Islam is fulfilled, such that the married life becomes a part of the life of a believer in this world where he lives with the highest level and happiness which surpasses all other human beings.
The actions and behaviors of a believer in life are considered a fixed path which he neither hesitates nor agitates to follow. This is because all of his actions must be linked to Hukm Shariah without considering his personal opinion or inclinations, or others that could be influenced by external provocative influences to derail him from his path and consequently, from his belief of abiding to the Hukm Shariah. Thus, a believer does not undertake his actions dictated by reality. Instead, he undertakes any action as dictated by Hukm Shariah about the reality. Iman is a way of life and not a circumstantial connection to thought or goal or objective. The believer faces all of the life affairs, its problems, and its situations with the creed of Iman firmly rooted in himself and with what is obliged to abide by the Hukm Shariah as long as he is alive. Hudhaifah (ra) narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: «لاَ تَكُونُوا إِمَّعَةً تَقُولُونَ إِنْ أَحْسَنَ النَّاسُ أَحْسَنَّا وَإِنْ ظَلَمُوا ظَلَمْنَا وَلَكِنْ وَطِّنُوا أَنْفُسَكُمْ إِنْ أَحْسَنَ النَّاسُ أَنْ تُحْسِنُوا وَإِنْ أَسَاءُوا فَلاَ تَظْلِمُوا» “Do not be a people without a will of your own, saying: ‘If people treat us well, we will treat them well; and if they do wrong, we will do wrong,’ but accustom yourselves to do good if people do good, and do not behave unjustly if they do evil.” [Bukhari]
A believing man or woman must never forget that being patient over what the person hated has a reward from Allah (swt) and it absolves the sin. There are many hadith of the Prophet (saw) regarding this. Abu Huraira (ra) reported the Messenger of Allah (saw) as saying, «لَا يَزَالُ الْبَلَاءُ بِالْمُؤْمِنِ أَوِ الْمُؤْمِنَةِ فِي نَفْسِهِ وَمَالِهِ وَوَلَدِهِ حَتَّى يَلْقَى اللَّهَ تَعَالَى وَمَا عَلَيْهِ مِنْ خَطِيئَةٍ» “The believing man or woman continues to have affliction in person, property and children so that they may finally meet Allah (swt) free from sin.” [Tirmidhi]
Thus, if a husband hates something about his wife and he is patient with her, or if a wife hates something about her husband and she is patient with him, then it is a reward for both of them inshaa’ Allah. ‘Ulema, righteous and good people of the Ummah realized this reality and lived by it. Ibn Arabi mentions: Abu al-Qasim bin Habib (Bil Mahdiya) told me, from Abul Qasim Al-Suri from Abu Bakr bin Abdullah who said: There was a Sheikh Abu Muhammed bin Abu Zaid who is a renowned ‘Aalim in terms of status and knowledge. He had a wife who treated him badly, neglecting his rights and verbally abused him. It is said that he remained patient with her and he used to say: ‘I am a man upon whom Allah has perfected His blessings in terms of my body health, my knowledge and what my right hand possessed. Perhaps, she was sent as a punishment for my sins and I fear that leaving her would inflict me with more severe punishment than this.’
The basis of marital cohabitation is the acceptance of the soul, whether male or female, to perform its role in the life with content which Allah (swt) has prepared for the individual aside from characteristics and abilities. Thus, any rebellion to the nature of the soul, or restlessness over the obligation, may justify the beginning of deviation from the path of complete mutual understanding for blissful intimacy. Cohabitation will not succeed just from the man alone or from the woman alone. Since cohabitation in the marriage means the mingling of physical bodies of the spouses, their sensations, the integration of one’s thought with another and the association of one’s soul to another, this cohabitation must be organized by clarifying the obligations and rights of man and the obligations and rights of woman. Upon examining the Quranic verses and Prophetic hadiths that have come for this subject, we find that Allah (swt) did not leave any small or great thing in organizing the family life that exists in the marriage. It is like the Creation of the universe by Allah (swt), Who did not leave any small or great thing except that He (swt) has blessed them with complete perfection.
Allah (swt) obliges upon man the responsibility of managing the affairs of his wife such as financial maintenance, intercourse, providing food, clothing and shelter, protection and medication. All these should be in the best manner with good cohabitation. Allah (swt) obliges the woman to obey her husband and submit to him and all these would need to be performed by her. Thus, it is upon her to cook for her husband, clean the house, look after the hygiene of her children, whilst protecting the wealth of her husband, his house and his reputation in his absence. She will not permit anyone to enter her husband’s home without his permission, nor will she leave the house without his permission. She will not be excessive in demands over him, even in the essential needs, such that she will not be persistent. She will not give the wealth of her husband without his permission, even if it is just food. She will not spend his wealth without his consent, nor will she fast voluntary fasts without his permission. She will not disobey his order and she will obey him even in his absence. She will not raise her voice above her husband’s voice. She will not be rude or insolent with her husband, nor will she commit illicit or indecent behavior. She will not prevent him in any case whatsoever, and work diligently and continuously to please him. It is upon man to prevent her behavior which is without his permission and she should consent to this. All these matters are from the Hukm Shariah and performing them yields reward from Allah (swt). Islam has encouraged good cohabitation in order for the spouses to enjoy the blissful life. This is because the intention of marriage is to have complete happiness in life.
Allah (swt) gives a way out for failure, such that misery does not afflict human-beings throughout their life. Nevertheless, before reaching the level of Talaq (swt), Allah (swt) commanded spouses to take concrete measures to treat the failure. Allah (swt) ordered man to show kindness to his wife and have enjoyment with her even with artificiality. He (swt) ordered the wife to completely obey her husband. If a husband gets angry, the wife must seek to please him. If he is pleased, the wife has rewards and if he is not pleased, she is excused before Allah (swt). When a man behaves illicitly such as distancing himself from the wife or hating his wife i.e. he can no longer have companionship with her, Allah (swt) encourages the wife to compromise with him, in whatever possible way, in order to remain as a wife under his care. When a woman behaves illicitly or commits indecency, it is upon her husband to remind her with the remembrance of Allah (swt) and His rulings, and her Shariah obligations to abstain from disobedience, rudeness and verbal abuses, warning her of the punishment of Allah (swt) for her illicit and indecent conduct. If she is not deterred by his separation from her marital bed and if she does not retreat from her path, perhaps she will calm down and return; otherwise, he can beat her lightly (without causing injury or leaving a mark). Allah (swt) says:
وَلِلرِّجَالِ عَلَيْهِنَّ دَرَجَةٌ
“But the men [i.e., husbands] have a degree over them [in responsibility and authority].” [TMQ Surah Baqarah 2:228]. Ibn Abbas (ra) commented on this: ‘Mentioning of the degree is an indication to urge man to have good intimacy, being generous to their women in terms of wealth and character, i.e. it is best for him to restrain himself.’ This degree will make the men bear the greatest responsibility and it is not a greater authority for injustice, as thought by some naive and ignorant. Allah (swt) has made reward equivalent to the martyr of the Hereafter for the woman who obeys her husband, fulfilling her life’s obligations in the marriage affairs, with content.
Asma Bin Yazid Al-Ansariya came to the Prophet (saw) whilst he was amongst his Companions and she said: “May my mother and father be sacrificed for you! O Messenger of Allah (saw), I am delegated on behalf of the women to you. Allah (saw) has sent you to all the men and women and we believed you and your Lord. We, the women folks, are confined to your homes, but you, the men folks, are preferred over us in congregational and Jumma prayers, visiting the sick, attending the funerals and Hajj one after another. Above all, they participate in Jihad in the Path of Allah. If one of you goes out to make Hajj or Umrah or to participate in Jihad, we protect your wealth, weaving the garments for you and bringing up your children. Shall we not share with you this reward and goodness?’ So the Prophet (saw) turned his face completely to his Companions and asked: «هل سمعتم مسألة قط أحسن من مسألتها في أمر دينها، من هذه؟»“Have you ever heard a question better than hers in the matter of her Deen than this one?” They said: “O Messenger of Allah! We never thought of a woman who would seek guidance like her.” So the Prophet (saw) turned towards her and said: «انصرِفي أيَّتُها المرأةُ وأعلِمي من وراءكِ من النِّساءِ أن حُسنَ تَبعُّلِ إحداكنَّ لزوجِها وطلبَها مَرضاتَهُ واتِّباعَها موافقتهُ يعدِلُ ذلِكَ كلَّهِ»“Understand O Woman! And teach it to all the women behind you that being good to her husband and seeking to please him and following his consent are equivalent to all the above.”
Prohibition of Disclosing Secrets between the Spouses and the Concealing of Intimacy
Allah (swt) and the Messenger of Allah (saw) honored marital intimacy (marital companionship) with great care and He (swt) legislated laws that protect it from all evils and harm, preserving it with dignity and chastity. Thus, Islam prevents malicious gossip, backbiting and revealing of secrets between the spouses, as these would cultivate malice and hatred, making a life between them impossible and so the Shaytan would win in the easiest way. The prohibition of disclosing the secrets of one of the two spouses is a part of preserving the trust (Amanah) amongst people. Muslim and Abu Dawud narrated from the Messenger of Allah (saw) who said:
«إنَّ مِن أَعْظَمِ الأمَانَةِ عِنْدَ اللهِ يَومَ القِيَامَةِ، الرَّجُلَ يُفْضِي إلى امْرَأَتِهِ، وَتُفْضِي إِلَيْهِ، ثُمَّ يَنْشُرُ سِرَّهَا»
“The most important of the trusts in the sight of Allah on the Day of judgment is that a man goes (intercourse with) to his wife and she goes to him, whilst he then divulges her secret.” Abu Saed reported a hadith with same meaning in which the Prophet (saw) said: «إنَّ من شرِّ الناسِ عندَ اللهِ منزِلةً يومَ القيامةِ، الرجلُ يُفضِي إلى امرأتِه وتُفضِي إليِهِ، ثُم يَنشرُ سِرَّهَا»“The worst of people in position before Allah on the Day of Resurrection is the man who has intercourse with his wife, and she with him, and then one of them spreads the secrets of the other.” Jabir ibn Abdullah reported from the Messenger of Allah (saw) who said: «الْمَجَالِسُ بِالأَمَانَةِ إِلاَّ ثَلاَثَةَ مَجَالِسَ سَفْكُ دَمٍ حَرَامٍ أَوْ فَرْجٌ حَرَامٌ أَوِ اقْتِطَاعُ مَالٍ بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ»“Meetings are confidential except three: those for the purpose of shedding blood unlawfully, or committing fornication, or acquiring property unjustly.” (Abu Daud)
Disclosing of secrets occurs mostly after a woman refuses to be good to her husband. Thus, Allah (swt) prohibited the repudiation and the Prophet (saw) described it as Kufr. Jaber (ra) reported: «شَهِدْتُ مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم الصَّلاَةَ يَوْمَ الْعِيدِ فَبَدَأَ بِالصَّلاَةِ قَبْلَ الْخُطْبَةِ بِغَيْرِ أَذَانٍ وَلاَ إِقَامَةٍ ثُمَّ قَامَ مُتَوَكِّئًا عَلَى بِلاَلٍ فَأَمَرَ بِتَقْوَى اللَّهِ وَحَثَّ عَلَى طَاعَتِهِ وَوَعَظَ النَّاسَ وَذَكَّرَهُمْ ثُمَّ مَضَى حَتَّى أَتَى النِّسَاءَ فَوَعَظَهُنَّ وَذَكَّرَهُنَّ فَقَالَ تَصَدَّقْنَ فَإِنَّ أَكْثَرَكُنَّ حَطَبُ جَهَنَّمَ فَقَامَتْ امْرَأَةٌ مِنْ سِطَةِ النِّسَاءِ سَفْعَاءُ الْخَدَّيْنِ فَقَالَتْ لِمَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ لِأَنَّكُنَّ تُكْثِرْنَ الشَّكَاةَ وَتَكْفُرْنَ الْعَشِيرَ قَالَ فَجَعَلْنَ يَتَصَدَّقْنَ مِنْ حُلِيِّهِنَّ يُلْقِينَ فِي ثَوْبِ بِلَالٍ مِنْ أَقْرِطَتِهِنَّ وَخَوَاتِمِهِنَّ»“I observed prayer with the Messenger of Allah (saw) on the ‘Eid day. He commenced with Salah before the Khutba without Adhan and Iqama. He then stood up leaning on Bilal, and he commanded (them) to be on guard (against evil for the sake of) Allah, and he exhorted (them) on obedience to Him, and he preached to the people and admonished them. He then walked on till he came to the women and preached to them and admonished them, and asked them to give alms, for most of them are the fuel for Hell. A woman from amongst the middle of women having a dark spot on the cheek stood up and said: Why is it so, Messenger of Allah? He said: For you grumble often and repudiate your husbands (تكفرنَ العشير). And then they began to give alms out of their ornaments such as their earrings and rings which they threw onto the cloth of Bilal.” (Muslim) The meaning of the phrase (سطة النساء) ‘Middle woman’ is the middlemost woman in terms of honor and lineage. The phrase (سفعاء الخدين) ‘having dark spot on the cheeks’ means the cheeks are black, the word (الشكاة) means complaining and the word (العشير Al-asheer) means the husband, literally the cohabitant.
Muslim narrated on the authority of ‘Abdullah b. Umar that the Messenger of Allah (saw) observed: «يَا مَعْشَرَ النِّسَاءِ تَصَدَّقْنَ وَأَكْثِرْنَ الاِسْتِغْفَارَ فَإِنِّي رَأَيْتُكُنَّ أَكْثَرَ أَهْلِ النَّارِ». فَقَالَتِ امْرَأَةٌ مِنْهُنَّ جَزْلَةٌ وَمَا لَنَا يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَكْثَرَ أَهْلِ النَّارِ؟ قَالَ: «تُكْثِرْنَ اللَّعْنَ وَتَكْفُرْنَ الْعَشِيرَ»“O womenfolk, you should give charity and ask much forgiveness for I saw you in bulk amongst the dwellers of Hell. A wise lady among them said: Why is it, Messenger of Allah, that our folk is in bulk in Hell? Upon this the Prophet observed: You curse too much and are ungrateful to your spouses.” (Muslim). The word ‘(رأيتكنَّ) ’I have seen you’ in the hadith refers to the Revelation.
The excess in grumbling, the excess of cursing and the repudiation of husbands i.e. refusal to good treatment of husbands and the spreading of secrets have all clearly been forbidden in Islam without ambiguity. Islam has equated the punishment of those forbidden acts to Hellfire, as they are dangerous for marriage. This is because all those acts, collectively or individually, indicate the dissatisfaction of a woman about her life with her husband. This would definitely lead to divorce. Accordingly, it is not permitted for a woman to grumble about anything in life’s affairs if the husband fulfills her rights by dealing with the Taqwa of Allah (swt), treating her with kindness and goodness. The complaining of a woman over the housing, furniture, repairing the damaged devices, changing curtains or over the basic or non-basic needs, or over the abundance or lack of provisions, illness, vacations, going out or receiving someone, or even about the shortage of food and abundance of work, with the refusal to have servants, none of this gives her the right to grumble and complain about them. Indeed, it is Haram to make complaints about them. Instead, she should request for them gently.
We seek refuge from the repudiation of the husband, for Allah (swt) says in His Noble Quran:
وَلَئِنْ كَفَرْتُمْ إِنَّ عَذَابِي لَشَدِيدٌ
“But if you deny, indeed, My punishment is severe.” [TMQ Surah Ibrahim :7]. It has been related in Qurtubi’s Tafsir regarding its meaning: “i.e. ‘if you deny My rights’. And it was also said ‘if you deny My blessings’’ [End Quote]. Thus kufr is denying the rights of Allah (swt) and His blessings. Allah (swt) and His Messenger (saw) have equated the denial of rights by the wife and His blessings with kufr, in the sense of denying the rights. This is because Allah (swt) has made the system of male-female relations, the multiplication of progeny, their interdependence, their mercy towards one another, and lineage and relation with in-laws, all based within the system of marriage. The principle of this system (i.e. the marriage system) made by Allah (swt) is the greater qiyyamah (authority) of men over women in all matters, including the obligations of guardianship and responsibilities. This principle is followed by another principle, or ruling, of punishment of a man in life, for not fulfilling this role. Thus, Islam secured and ensured for man to fulfill some of his rights in this world, whilst some of these burdens may be relieved from him, so that he will not despair, dishearten, evade or abandon all of them, or the heaviest of them, which is marriage.
Allah (swt) obliged to relieve a man from some of his burdens and He (swt) imposed it justly in order to preserve the system of marriage. This is for the purpose which Allah (swt) wanted and not just for the sexual pleasure alone, which is just one of its characteristics that disappears at certain times, or when accustomed to intimacy. Thus, Allah (swt) commands the wife to soften and be inviting towards her husband. He (swt) made this softening and her obedience to her husband as the basis of the marriage system, just as critical as the obligation of guardianship upon man. This is because the nature of man is that he does not accept taking care of those who disobey him. Thus, if a store owner has a partner who disagrees with him, either he has to sell the store and break up the partnership, or he has to continue, although this will negatively affect his work. If an employee disobeys his employer, the employer will dismiss him, no matter how important he is. If a son disobeys his father, his father will expel and banish him from the house. Similarly, the disobedience of a wife is a conclusive prohibition, as it would definitely, but rare cases which have their own circumstances, lead to distancing from her husband i.e. the breaking up of the marriage, as in the case of two business partners.
If the marital disobedience were permitted in Islam, just as it is permitted in some Western societies in the last century, all the values commanded by Allah (swt) for Muslims would have collapsed, as there would not have been a family unit as we know now. There is not enough scope in this writing to compare or discuss the family conditions in societies whose foundation is based on the permissibility of adultery.
Obedience by the women of her husband is not a man-made thing, nor is it an approved tradition. Instead, it is an obligation from Allah (swt). The recognition of woman as a wife with this obligation and her compliance to her husband are the obligations from Allah (swt) and not from man. If a woman disobeys her husband and her husband did not divorce her, he will not be subject to any punishment, whilst her punishment will remain upon her disobedience and she will receive abundant punishment on the Day of Reckoning. This obligation, the obligation of obedience of a woman to her husband, is not an excessive burden on a woman. Instead, it is the burden equivalent to some of the burdens of man in life. It is a part of taking care of her husband and children. It is not a burden equivalent to all the obligations which Allah (swt) has obliged upon man. This obedience of a woman acts as a reviving fuel for man, so that he is able to move in his life, facing other burdens. The disobedience is like depriving him of the fuels necessary for his life. He is able to face other burdens of life, without marriage. He is also able to face other burdens of life with marriage and obedience of his wife, as these burdens are unrelated to the burdens of marriage. However, with marriage and disobedience of his wife, he is overburdened and he will be unable to bear the other burdens of life by his nature. Allah (swt) knows that best, since the obligation of obedience is from Allah (swt), as one of the rights of Allah (swt) given to the husband.
In view of its great danger to the entity of the Ummah and the establishment of Islamic rulings upon the earth, Allah (swt), the Lord of the heavens and the earth, the Mighty and Almighty, has made the obedience of the wife as one of the rights of Allah (swt) that are placed before all the other rights of Allah (swt). So Allah (swt) has prescribed an order upon the heavens and earth not to hear the prayer or supplication of a disobedient woman, other than her own ears. So, these acts will not be written as good by the angels, nor will they be surrounded by angels, and Allah (swt), the Mighty Al-Jabbar will not accept them. This is the denial of the rights of Allah (swt) and thus it is like kufr as Allah (swt) says:
وَلَئِنْ كَفَرْتُمْ إِنَّ عَذَابِي لَشَدِيدٌ
“But if you deny (Kufr), indeed, My punishment is severe.” [TMQ Surah Ibrahim:7]. It has been related in the Tafseer of the verse to mean the denial of Allah’s rights. The disobedience of a wife of her husband may be one of the biggest and clearest parameters and factors of denying the rights of Allah (swt). So how will the woman who disobeys her husband be absolved on the Day of Reckoning from the punishment for denying the rights of Allah, which is kufr?
This is related to the rights of Allah (swt) and Allah (swt) knows best. Let us look at the denial of the blessings of Allah (swt). Many people do not appreciate any of the blessings of Allah (swt) and they are not rightfully aware of them. For instance, a healthy body cannot know the true burden of disease until it has experienced it. One who is blessed with sight does not know the real difference in life between him and the blind. Examples of blessings cannot be enumerated as they are in every matter and thing. In such a way, marriage is a blessing from Allah (swt) upon mankind, including both men and women, without any discrimination, just as life is a blessing for mankind, both men and women. However, some deviants, with their intellectual aberrations, may reach to the conclusion that life is misery for a person, so they end it by committing suicide, whilst they may know that the punishment for what they have done is the eternal Hellfire. Yet, they do not care and commit suicide. When Allah (swt) favored upon His servants with His blessings to enjoy them, He (swt) defined how to enjoy His blessings upon them. He also prohibited denial of these blessings or depriving anyone of them from a position of authority, power and the ability to transgress and injustice. Thus, every individual has freedom to attain the blessings of Allah (swt) and He has made it easy for him to attain those blessings in order to enjoy them in permitted ways to the extent he wants or he could, whether the permissible enjoyments are many or few. If the enjoyment of the blessings is limited to his action on his own accord and they are not related to the rights of others, then he has a right to enjoy those blessings or leave them. For instance, apples are the blessing from Allah (swt) and eating the apple is not related to the rights of others, so he can either eat it or not. Gazing at the stars in the sky at night or reading books is a permitted blessing; however, it is not permitted to look at the awrah of the woman who is not the wife. Accordingly, examples are not limited and marriage is one of those, which is the subject of our study. Marriage is the blessing from Allah (swt) in its reality and in the description by Allah (swt). However, this blessing has two rights, two obligations and two responsibilities i.e. both the husband and the wife. When marriage is contracted between the two, Allah’s blessings upon them is realized. When the marriage contract is broken, this blessing of Allah (swt) goes away with it, as its resting place is marriage and not in a man or
a woman alone. In order to preserve this blessing, Allah (swt) commanded to preserve the marriage between the servants. If a husband oppresses his wife, he has prevented her from the blessing which Allah (swt) bestowed upon her. Accordingly, the husband deserves punishment in the Hereafter. Moreover, Allah (swt) has made legislation to put an end to his oppression in this world. However, in most of the cases, the oppression of a man of his wife is imagined and not a reality, as the limits of injustice set by Shariah can be rarely traversed by a man, except by deviant transgressors. The Islamic legislation by which Allah (swt) regulates the lives of couples easily treats the injustice of the believing man. It is rare for his injustice to lead a woman to divorce.
Obedience of a husband by a wife guarantees the continuation of marriage, consequently guaranteeing the existence of the blessing of marriage upon man and woman, which in itself is described as a blessing from Allah (swt). The best of all the blessings and treasures is a woman who is righteous and obedient. If her obedience to her husband departs, the description of marriage being a blessing and better than all the blessings also departs. It is difficult for a man to bear the disobedience of his wife. In most of the cases the disobedience of the wife would definitely lead to divorce, and the destruction of the blessings of Allah (swt) which Allah (swt) has bestowed upon her and her husband. This destruction, squandering and disintegration of the blessing of Allah (swt), with the destruction of marriage, resulting from the disobedience of the wife, is the denial of the blessing of Allah (swt), which in this reality is represented by the husband. Thus, denial of the blessing of Allah (swt) is a cause for the denial of the husband. It is a manifestation of the denial of husband, by disobeying him. It is prohibited by Allah (swt). Thus the husband is the blessing of Allah (swt) and repudiation of the husband is the denial of the blessing of Allah (swt) which is kufr. Allah (swt) says in surah Ibrahim:
وَلَئِنْ كَفَرْتُمْ إِنَّ عَذَابِي لَشَدِيدٌ
“But if you deny (Kufr), indeed, My punishment is severe.” [TMQ Surah Ibrahim:7]. We reiterate what comes in the Tafseer of Qurtubi: ‘Which means (i.e. the saying of Quran ‘if you deny’) ‘if you deny my rights’. It is also said ‘if you deny my blessings’ End Quote.
As a husband is amongst the blessings of Allah (swt), marriage is amongst the blessings of Allah (swt), whist denial of intimacy and repudiation destroys the stores of blessings. This is because marriage is neither a single blessing nor is it of the blessings that can be counted. Instead, marriage is a bundle of blessings, which means a mass that includes stores i.e. it has great collections that are protected from any evil or aggression or defamation. With the passage of time, the blessing of marriage increases by the grace of Allah (swt) and does not decrease. If denying the blessing of Allah (swt) is kufr, will the wife who destroyed her marriage which is the great collection of blessings, be absolved, due to her repudiation of her husband? Will the one who destroyed the blessings, who denied the Ummah of many blessings, let alone a single blessing, get absolved from the punishment of denying the blessing of Allah (swt), which is one amongst the acts of Kufr? The Prophet (saw) said:
«لا يَنظرُ اللَّهُ إلى امرأةٍ لا تَشكرُ لزوجِها وَهيَ لا تَستَغني عنهُ»
“Allah will not look upon a woman who is ungrateful to her husband and she benefitted from him.” Thus, the obligation of gratitude begins with the blessing or blessings of Allah (swt). The implicit meaning of the hadith ‘who is ungrateful towards her husband’ indicates and affirms that the husband is the basis of all the blessings of Allah (saw) upon a woman. ‘Allah will not look’ means ‘Allah will not have mercy (on her).’ The word “who is ungrateful towards her husband” means: ‘Who does not obey, who is not good at obeying her husband, who does not obey her husband in a way that he is pleased with.’ Gratitude towards Allah (swt) is worshipping Him i.e. obeying Him by implementing his rulings in the way that Allah (swt) orders. And gratitude towards husbands is like the gratitude towards parents, which is obedience that the husband is pleased with, with pleasure to accept, as well as obedience with apparent recognition of grace.
Yusuf Ahmed Badarani from the book (العائلة قلعة) “The Family is a Fortress”
(Translated)
-
Self-Justification: The Whispers of Shaytaan
A Muslim who grows up in Western society learns how to think and act in a way alien to Islam. Although often brought up in a Muslim household some Muslim youth are unfortunately swayed by the rotten fruits of Western society including drugs, alcohol and illicit relationships. They are tempted by these rotten fruits and end up in a downward spiral growing further away from Islam every day.
Initially the salah is performed now and again, then restricted to Friday and then only to ‘Eid. The degrees to which people go into committing haram differ and everyone knows someone who they perceive as worse than themselves and better than themselves. One of the worst intellectual diseases that people have is that of self justification, it is one of the key issues that allows people to drift away from Islam justifying this to themselves every step of the way. Initially they may have the occasional joint, then it becomes a regular habit and they move on to harder substances to increase the high. Even though Muslims feel guilty when committing overtly haram actions like drinking alcohol, taking drugs or engaging in haram relationships with the opposite sex, eventually the guilt wears off and they begin to justify these actions to themselves.
We must realize that self-justifying an action will not make it halal and doesn’t remove the inevitable reality of standing in front of Allah on the Day of Judgment, with nothing except our deeds. It is the Western concept of individualism that breeds the mentality of pure greed and selfishness where people even steal and back stab their own families to achieve their sick version of enjoyment.
TYPES OF SELF-JUSTIFICATION
There are different types of excuses or self–justifications which individuals carry. People normally carry a combination of them. Some of the most common types of self-justifications that people hold are the following:
– “At least I’m better than others”
– “I will change in the future”
– “I’m not ready for it yet, its too difficult to change”
– “As long as I’m pure inside, Allah will forgive me”“AT LEAST I’M BETTER THAN OTHERS”
The individual who holds this idea looks at the extreme actions of people which they consider as ‘bad” such as stealing from Muslims, rape or eating pork and compare their own actions to them. They feel reassured that they are better than those who undertake those actions. When they commit haram or neglect the Islamic duties (fara’id) they think to themselves that at least they are not like others, at least they perform some actions of Islam. If they take drugs they say, “at least I don’t drink alcohol”. If they have haram relations with the opposite sex they say, “at least I have the intention of marriage”. When involving in haram contracts they say, “at least I don’t steal”. If they miss the obligatory salah they justify it to themselves by thinking, ‘at least I pray on Friday’.
By extending their logic you could say, ‘at least a homosexual isn’t a rapist’ and ‘at least an alcoholic doesn’t eat pork’. The problem with this argument is, who defines what type of behavior is bad and what is good? Allah (swt) is the one who defines the good actions from the bad actions. Allah (swt) views the halal actions as good and all the haram actions as evil. So in the sight of Allah (swt missing salah, being rebellious to your parents, eating pork, rape, socializing with non related members of the opposite sex, homosexuality, taking intoxicating drugs, drinking alcohol and adultery are all haram and from the munkaraat (evil) actions that lead to the hellfire.
“I WILL CHANGE IN THE FUTURE”
This notion is commonly held by many youth. They believe that they will change in the future when they become older, they will settle down, get married, have children, go to Hajj and begin practicing Islam. This excuse allows them to justify the haram to themselves.
If it was as simple as that, everyone can act as they please with the hope of changing someday in the future. How many of us know of young people who have died? How many of us know of cases where boyfriend and girlfriend have died in car accidents?
Muslims and non-Muslims alike can agree that the most definite thing in life is death. If this is the case, how can we act as if we are going to live forever?
The Messenger of Allah (saw) said to ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (ra), “If you awoke in the morning, do not speak to yourself of the evening, and if you reach the evening, do not speak to yourself of the morning. Take from your life for your death, and from your health for your illness, as you do not know what your name will be tomorrow.” [Bukhari]
The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “The clever one is he who disciplined himself and worked for what is after death, and the feeble one is he who followed his desires, then made (vain) prayers to Allah.”
Allah (swt) said, “Say: The death from which you flee will truly overtake you: then will you be sent back to the Knower of all things secret and open: and He will tell you (the truth of) the things that you did!” [TMQ Al-Jumu’a: 8]
Besides the inevitable reality of death, do we believe that Allah (swt) will accept our good deeds in the future whilst we committed haram during our youth? Do we think that performing salah and avoiding the evil temptations in our old age when it is easier to do so will grant us Jannah?
“Until, when death comes to one of them, he says: ‘O my Lord! Send me back (to life), in order that I may do good in that which I have left behind!’ – No! It is but a word that he speaks; and behind them is a Partition until the Day they are raised up. Then when the Trumpet is blown, there will be no more kinship among them that day, nor will they ask of one another! Then those whose scales (of good deeds) are heavy, they are the successful. And those whose scales (of good deeds) are light, they are those who lose their own selves; in Hell will they abide.” [TMQ Al-Mu’minun: 99-103]
“I’M NOT READY FOR IT YET, IT’S TOO DIFFICULT TO CHANGE”
The true meaning behind this excuse is that people don’t want to leave the haram they’re committing. They have got so used to their lifestyle that they can’t perceive it any other way. The thought of waking up for fajr salah, having to continuously study Islam or not ‘chilling’ with the opposite sex is too much for them. There are obvious contradictions in their behaviour; many of them will spend a lot of time on things they enjoy whether its playing computer games, physical training, sports or ‘looking good’. In reality these people are lazy when it comes to Islam, they may spend so much effort in fitting in with the crowd and keeping up with the latest trend yet they are not willing to spend effort in staying away from the fire of hell and attempting to gain Jannah and the pleasure of Allah (swt).
We need to realise that in order to become Islamic personalities we have to live our life according to the objective that Allah (swt) has set for us. Why is it that many work hard when it comes to their exams, yet pay little attention to the true exam of life? Allah (swt) didn’t create us for play.
Life is not all about ease and acting like spoilt teenagers who have everything done for them. All of us have the capacity to become Islamic personalities. Islam wasn’t revealed for angels, it was revealed for human beings. Allah (swt) says,“Allah does not place a burden upon a person except that which he is capable of.” [TMQ al-Baqarah: 282]
How can one then argue that following Islam is too difficult? Whoever believes this should look at the example of converts to Islam who completely transform their behaviour and may even face hardship from their families. If they can change why can’t we? If we look to the example of many of the Sahabah (ra) they used to be the worst of people and then became the best. Take the example of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra). He was a man that wanted to kill the Messenger of Allah (saw) and who had even buried his two daughters alive. When he embraced Islam he became the best of people.
‘Umar (ra) was neither a prophet nor angel; he was a person like us. This type of complete transformation of personalities is not restricted to the companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw). There are many examples from Muslims in our own communities in the West who used to be notorious criminals, drug dealers and alcoholics and who became active Islamic personalities working for the return of Islam when they received the Islamic da’wah (call).
Abu Hurayrah narrated that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “People are like mines of silver and gold; the best of them in the days of Ignorance (jahilliyah) are the best of them in Islam when they attain knowledge.” [Muslim]
This hadith means that no matter how far away from Islam we are, we all have the potential to change and become the best of people.
“AS LONG AS I’M PURE FROM INSIDE, ALLAH WILL FORGIVE ME”
The fact that someone has this delusion proves that they are not pure from inside because they carry this corrupt notion, which contradicts Islam. Being ‘pure inside’ not only means believing in Islam, it also means practising it. What is the point of the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (saw) if Allah (swt) is going to enter everyone into Jannah without accounting them for their deeds? Believing in this idea allows people to gamble their life away. It will be too late to change on the Day of Judgement, when everyone will be worried about themselves to the extent that even the Prophets of Allah like Adam (as), Musa (as) and ‘Isa (as) will be worried about themselves. When the earth will narrate the actions that we performed on it and our own body will speak to Allah (swt) about what we did whilst alive. Every single action small or large will be accounted on that day.
“So whosoever does good equal to the weight of an atom, shall see it. And whosoever does evil equal to the weight of an atom, shall see it.” [TMQ Al-Zalzalah: 7]
The forgiveness of Allah (swt) is not achieved with false prayers, whilst continuing to disobey His commands. Allah (swt) says,
“Of no effect is the repentance of those who continue to do evil deeds, until death faces one of them, and he says: ‘Now I repent’ nor of those who die while they are disbelievers. For them have we prepared a painful torment.” [TMQ Al-Nisa: 18]
SELF-JUSTIFICATIONS: WHISPERS OF SHAYTAN
Even though many don’t realise it, using self-justifications to follow our own desires instead of following the commands of Allah (swt) is directly following the footsteps of Shaytan. As Allah (swt) said, “Did I not enjoin on you O you children of Adam that you should not worship Shaytan; for that he was to you an enemy avowed?” [TMQ Ya-Seen: 60]
“O you who believe! Follow not the footsteps of the Shaytan (devil).” [TMQAl-Nur: 21]
How can we be believers in Islam if we abandon its rules and follow the Shaytan instead? The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “No one of has real Iman (belief) until his desires conform to what I came with.”
We must avoid the whispers of Shaytan. So every time we feel lazy in praying the salah, we should know that this is from the Shaytan. Every time we are about to answer back in a rebellious way to our parents, we should know this is from the Shaytan. Every time we get the temptation of committing haram with the opposite sex, we should know that this is from Shaytan. Every time we are about to neglect our duty to Allah or perform an action that will anger Him (swt), we should know that this is from the Shaytan. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “Shaytan reaches everywhere in the human body as blood reaches in it.”
“Shaytan only seeks to breed animosity and spite among you by means of intoxicants and gambling and to keep you from the remembrance of Allah and from salah (prayer); will you not then desist?” [TMQ l-Ma’idah: 91]
We should seek refuge from these whispers of Shaytan as Allah taught us in the Qur’an, “Say: I seek refuge with the Lord of Mankind. The King of mankind. The God of mankind. From the evil of the sneaking whisperer. Who whispers in the breasts of mankind. From amongst the Jinn and the men.” [TMQ Al-Nas: 1-6]
Many of the youth would not undertake some of their haram actions in front of their parents due to embarrassment or fear, then how can they perform these actions whilst Allah sees everything they do? We should fear Allah and be embarrassed in front of Him. It was reported in sahih (authenticated) narrations that when Jibraeel (as) asked the Messenger about ihsan (perfection), he said, “To worship Allah as if you see him, and if you do not see him, then he surely sees you.”
BE TRUE TO YOURSELF
Self-justifications allow people to continue living their lives like animals, even though they know deep down that the path they are following is incorrect. Even after all the late night parties, relationships, drugs, fast cars, music and alcohol many feel an inevitable uneasiness or discontent. This feeling doesn’t easily go away, some learn to live with it while it eats away at their conscience while others decide to use their mind and start thinking about Islam; the only thinking man’s belief that provides tranquility.
Abdul Hamid Jassat
-
Nafsiya Reflections: Victory is Near!
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Nafsiya Reflections: Victory is Near!
Time seems still, frozen, lost. Our hearts, shattering, staring at our phones not believing our own eyes. The cries are unbearable. We walk through our days as if we are motionless, driving while our minds have not left the scenes we have seen. We go through our daily routines… our mind re-lives the horrific massacres, our minds cannot comprehend, watching our kids walking into their schools, carrying their backpacks… We cry on our way home. How is this happening? How is this real?
This Ummah is laid out on a platter for those with sick hearts to feast on. One piece at a time. Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Myanmar, or the “detention camps” in Xinjiang. Our eyes are now on our blessed land, the land of Masra Rasool Allah, Palestine. Our eyes are on Gaza. This Ummah is being tested. Allah (swt) is testing each and every single one of us. So, what is our response?
[وَلَنَبْلُوَنَّكُم بِشَيْءٍ مِّنَ الْخَوْفِ وَالْجُوعِ وَنَقْصٍ مِّنَ الْأَمْوَالِ وَالْأَنفُسِ وَالثَّمَرَاتِ ۗ وَبَشِّرِ الصَّابِرِينَ]
And We will surely test you with something of fear and hunger and a loss of wealth and lives and fruits, but give good tidings to the patient [Surah Al-Baqara: Aya 155]
[الَّذِينَ إِذَا أَصَابَتْهُم مُّصِيبَةٌ قَالُوا إِنَّا لِلَّهِ وَإِنَّا إِلَيْهِ رَاجِعُونَ]
Who, when disaster strikes them, say, “Indeed we belong to Allah, and indeed to Him we will return.” [Surah Al-Baqara: Aya 156]
[أُولَٰئِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ صَلَوَاتٌ مِّن رَّبِّهِمْ وَرَحْمَةٌ ۖ وَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُهْتَدُونَ]
Those are the ones upon whom are blessings from their Lord and mercy. And it is those who are [rightly] guided. [Surah Al-Baqara: Aya 157]
This Ummah was created to be the leader of this world. A mere glimpse into the faith of this Ummah has astounded the world, Subhan Allah. From their gratitude to Allah (swt) for all that has befallen them, by helping one another, or collecting all money and valuables to give back to any owners that may be alive. Unlike the soldiers of the Jewish entity who have looted the homes of their own people, and who have killed their own.
We see what is happening and may feel helpless… that we cannot end this genocide… But we can!! This Ummah can, never give up hope! Never forget who we are!! However, we need to address the root cause of all the suffering we as an Ummah have and are facing! We are stateless! No shield! No Mutasim! No Khalifah!
We are the most victorious Ummah! We must break through the shackles that the Puppet rulers placed on us, unite as One, and have Tawwakul! Once this happens, we will no longer be helpless, massacred, tortured, imprisoned, brutalized due to no Muslim Armies moving to the cries of the women and children!
Yes, our hearts ache, but we must have patience. Yes, Allah (swt) sees everything, and He is The Saboor, The Patient and will take revenge for every finger that pulled a trigger, pushed a button, every hand that beat, every leg that kicked, they will all stand before The Great (swt), trembling in horror. (Allahu akbar! Allahu akbar!)
HE (swt) hears us calling, crying to Him, for help, for strength, for power. We must trust in Allah’s (swt) plan, in Allah’s (swt) timing. The victory of this great Ummah is near, Insha’ Allah. It is SO near. We can feel it. Allah (swt) is preparing this earth for the great rise of the second righteous Caliphate on the method of the prophethood. The Caliphate state, that will break free all the oppressed from the grips of the oppressors of this world; and will revenge all who plotted against this great ummah. So, break free oh grandchildren of the Sahabah (ra)! Break free and save your Ummah! Your Ummah is waiting for you! The victory of Allah (swt) is near! Either through the great victory of martyrdom, the victory of overcoming our trials or the victory of the rise of our long-awaited state. The Khilafah is coming, and all will have to answer to it. The question is… Will Allah (swt) use you, oh armies of this Ummah, or will he replace you with ones that will?
[يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ مَن يَرْتَدَّ مِنكُمْ عَن دِينِهِۦ فَسَوْفَ يَأْتِى ٱللَّهُ بِقَوْمٍۢ يُحِبُّهُمْ وَيُحِبُّونَهُۥٓ أَذِلَّةٍ عَلَى ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَعِزَّةٍ عَلَى ٱلْكَـٰفِرِينَ يُجَـٰهِدُونَ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ وَلَا يَخَافُونَ لَوْمَةَ لَآئِمٍۢ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ فَضْلُ ٱللَّهِ يُؤْتِيهِ مَن يَشَآءُ ۚ وَٱللَّهُ وَٰسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ]
O believers! Whoever among you abandons their faith, Allah will replace them with others who love Him and are loved by Him. They will be humble with the believers but firm towards the disbelievers, struggling in the Way of Allah; fearing no blame from anyone. This is the favour of Allah. He grants it to whoever He wills. And Allah is All-Bountiful, All-Knowing. [Surah Al Maidah: Aya 54]
Ummah Voice Podcast
-
The Problem of the Stock Market
This article has been taken from the book “The turbulence of the stock markets: Their cause & the Shariah rule pertaining to the causes”, written in 1997
The Capitalist economic thought is an expedient thought that leads man to the pits, because it is based on the lowest motives of man, and the reality of the societies that adopt this thought is that they gasp for their living, production and consumption, with the material values as their only concern. Its reality shows also that a small group of capitalists dominate the overwhelming majority who work hard and live in constant anxiety, with most of them living in extreme poverty, unable to make ends meet (fulfil their basic needs). However, it would be wrong to wait for a major economic setback in the Western stock markets for the Muslims to realise that they had been duped by the capitalist thoughts and the stock markets and that they really are nothing but cobwebs. It is imperative to outline their reality now, to expose their corruption and explain that Islam forbids these thoughts and practices.
The stock markets in the West could not have come into being had it not been for three basic systems in the Capitalist economy. These are:
– The public limited companies system.
– The usurious banking system.
– The inconvertible paper money standard.These three systems have come together to split the Capitalist economy into two economies, or into two types of markets: the first represents the real economy where the production, marketing and real services take place, and the second is the financial economy, which some refer to as the parasite economy, where the contriving, buying and selling of various financial papers takes place. These are considered as binding contracts, or cheques or securities, representing a transferable right by one party that can be bought and sold, whether in a company property, its debts, government bonds or real estate or in many other (rights) certified by financial papers that are transferable, and considered as a temporary option to buy or sell another specific right at a price that differs from the current market price (e.g. options contracts). All this has no direct connection whatsoever with the real economy. This parasite financial economy has grown to the point where the value of its transactions have exceeded those transactions undertaken in the real economy by manifolds.
As for the public limited company’ system, it is set up in the first instance to enable businessmen and their businesses to protect their huge capital against the creditors and others who have interests in the business, in the event that some of these business ventures fail. It also enables them to control the ordinary shareholders who invest in these businesses. The distinguishing characteristic of the public company is that it has limited liability; hence if its business fails and losses are incurred, those who have rights upon the company would not be able to claim anything back from the investors, regardless of the amount of their capital (shareholding). They would only be able to claim back what is left in the company in terms of its capital.
It is an established convention in the West that the public limited company is established and declared by the state, not its founders. It is the state that issues the memorandum of association, specifies the nature of its business and the number of its shares. It is also the state that publishes the main articles of association. Hence, the public limited company has a corporeal personality that is totally independent of its investors. It gives the people who have a vested interest in the company the right to account it alone and not the investors. Thus the company’s liability is limited to what is left in the company itself and does not extend to what the investors have in terms of money.
When the state issues the memorandum of association for a public limited company, it appoints an interim board of directors from among the founders, i.e. those who have applied for the company to be established. The board would appoint a chairman and the company would start selling shares in the form of transferable certificates. The holder of such shares has a host of specific and limited rights. These would include his dividend from what the company decides to distribute in terms of profits or his share from the company’s capital if it decided to wind up its business. They also have the right to vote yearly to elect a new board of directors. However, all these rights are in relation to the shares they hold and not in relation to the investors. For instance, when voting for the board of directors, the votes would be according to the number of shares held and not according to the number of persons. Hence, if one person owned half of the shares plus one and if the number of the other shareholders who own the remaining shares were 100,000, that single shareholder with the majority shares would have the decisive vote in electing the board of directors, and the votes of the other shareholders would have no value whatsoever.
Businessmen do not usually need half the number of shares in a company in order to control it, sometimes 5% or 10% is sufficient. This could either be due to the fact that most of the small shareholders are dispersed, or due to co-operation between a group of major shareholders to elect a board of directors, thus controlling the capital of all the shareholders and managing all the company’s affairs. This is a tangible reality perceived by all people, and before such a reality, most of the shareholders would have no power to have any say over the capital they invested in the company, save for the trading in the shares of the company in the
stock market. This in fact does not make them partners in the company, but mere owners of company share certificates, which they buy and sell in the stock market, without the need of permission from either the company or its shareholders.
Furthermore, the stock markets enable the controlling shareholders to sell their shares without seeking anyone’s permission and without having to inform anyone. Hence, they could in fact wash their hands of any liability pertaining to the activities of the company which they controlled and for which they run its affairs. Also, when they wish to buy more shares, be it of the same company or another company, they need not consult anyone. What prompts them to buy some yet sell other shares is the motive for instant profit; thus, if the value of the shares of a company that they control increased, they would sell all or part of their shares, then if the value decreased they would buy their shares back. Therefore, they have no loyalty to the company or to other shareholders, or to the business of the company or its staff. The capitalists’ aim from controlling a certain company through its board of directors is merely to influence its activity in a manner leading to the rise in the value of its shares.
All this has led to a split between the stock markets and other securities, and the real economy, i.e. the reality of the companies whose shares are traded. What confirms this fact is the ratio (price/earnings ratio) that traders constantly monitor in the stock market, using it as a standard to gauge the increase and decrease in the value of shares of a specific company. It is the rate of the current price of a share compared with the annual dividend paid by the company for each single share. For instance if the annual profit of a single share were 2 dollars and the price of the share in the stock market were 40 dollars, the price/earnings ratio would be 20. In other words the profit of the company per share would be 5% of the price of that share. Newspapers publish these ratios daily, for all companies whose shares are traded in the stock markets. By reviewing these ratios, we note that they diverge from each other a great deal. The rate for some companies could in
some cases reach 100, while for others it could be as low as 5.This indicates the split in the relationship between the securities and stock markets, and the real economy and the reality of companies. It also indicates that the stock market has turned into a big casino. Speculation dominates the stock markets with sharp and repeated fluctuations becoming a feature of the market.
This is as far as the system of public limited companies is concerned. As for the usurious banking system, it is considered as the chief calamity of the Capitalist economy. This is so because thanks to it, the banks managed to collect people’s monies under the name of deposits and to dispose of their monies, as if they were the monies of the banks and not the monies of the depositors. They also managed to legitimize what they had collected in terms of funds from depositors by lending these funds to capitalists and businessmen, including traders in the stock markets, and also by lending money to the depositors themselves in some cases, then charging a guaranteed rate of interest for each loan.
However, this legitimizing process is only partial. This is so because the banks’ owners, most of whom happen to be capitalists and their companies, are given priority in acquiring loans, and these loans are at a reduced rate of interest. Other capitalists and businessmen are second on the list under the pretext that the default risks are minimal. Finally come the small businessmen and consumers from among the common people. This bias is clearly reflected in the disparity of the interest rates applied to each. In America for instance, the rate ranges from 5.8%on loans given to capitalists and major companies, to 20% on loans given to purchase a car. In conclusion, the interest system leads naturally to making people’s monies circulated among very few people.
The role of the banks in the stock markets is more dangerous than their role in the real economy. This is so because they lend the dealers of shares loans which exceed what they have in cash by manifolds. For instance, a share whose price in the stock market is $100.00 can be bought with $5.00 from the buyer’s own cash and $95.00 with money borrowed from the bank, or borrowed from brokerage houses who in turn borrow it from the bank. This means that this person who deals in the stock market can buy a number of shares whose price is twenty times more than his cash can buy. However, the bank does not lend this sort of money to anyone except the very wealthy capitalists, this means that only those persons would be able to multiply their purchasing power in the market, thanks to the banks, and consequently increase their influence over these markets and increase their wealth at the expense of the common people from among the depositors or the traders.
Since most of what is bought in terms of shares is financed by loans that hugely exceed their values, a sharp fall in share prices is often followed by a further fall. For instance, if a bank were to agree to lend one of the traders 90% of the value of shares which he wants to purchase, and this trader were to buy shares for$1,000,000 his loan from the bank would be $900,000. Then if we were to assume that the value of his shares fell by 20%, i.e. it became $800,000, the authorized loan would become $720,000, i.e. 90% of $800.000. In this case he would have to repay the bank immediately the sum of $180,000 of his loan, in order to maintain the percentage of the loan at 90% of the value of shares. If he had the money he would not be forced to sell any of his shares whereas if he did not have it, he would be forced to sell his shares immediately to pay off his outstanding debt to the bank. This would increase the supply of shares and would lead to a further decrease in prices. If a host of traders were put in the same situation, this would lead to a constant fall in prices and perhaps to an agitation in the market.
Therefore, the role of the usurious banking system in the stock market shifts between inflating and deflating trading and prices. Hence, when the prices of some specific shares increase, banks tend to offer large amounts of money in terms of loans to those who trade in those specific shares, thus multiplying the amount of cash they have at their disposal. Those traders would in turn rush to buy more shares and the prices would continue increasing to an exaggerated level. However, the situation could change overnight. The prices of some specific shares could fall for any reason, such as a rumor or the failure of a project. The banks in this case would reduce their lending due to the decrease in the value of the shares which acted as securities against the loans they had issued to the traders. Those traders would in turn resort to either selling some or all of the shares and this would precipitate a fall in prices to an exaggerated level. This would consequently lead the banks towards reducing further their lending due to the constant fall in share prices.
In answer to the question of where the banks get these funds from and where do they take them when they reduce their lending, the answer is that these funds belong to the depositors in the first place. Banks in the usurious banking system rely on people keeping their savings in the banks. They also rely on the fact that most of what is withdrawn from one account ends up in another account in the same bank or in another bank, and most of the monies remain in the banks. What the banks lend to borrowers is not in fact money in kind that goes out of the banks’ deposits, but rather a money in an account, that the bank creates by opening two accounts for the borrower, one for the loan that he owes and another as a account holding the sum generated from the loan, for the borrower to withdraw what he needs. If most of the depositors and borrowers were to withdraw their deposits in cash all at once, they would not be able to do so, because most of those deposits are turned into loans which may be losses or may be in other banks, and thus they cannot be cashed in instantly. In such a case, the bank would often have to be shut down and liquidated.
The usurious banking system is based on trust in the banks and based on the fact that people’s deposits are safe, i.e. that they can withdraw all of their deposits whenever they wished. However,
this statement is deceptive and different from the reality of the banks. This deception has been exposed several times in the West and in other parts of the world, when depositors could not withdraw their deposits and lost huge sums of money as a result, and the banks were shut or declared bankrupt. Therefore, the West invented the inconvertible paper money, also known as Compulsory Bills. The supervision of this inconvertible money is assigned by the government to a central bank. And all this is merely to cover up the flaws of the usurious banking system, and to cover up the fact that it is based on deception, to prevent it from collapsing and to maintain people’s confidence in the Capitalist system.
The inconvertible paper money system gives powers to the Central Bank to issue a currency to be circulated throughout the country in the shape of printed papers that have no intrinsic value whatsoever. The government forces people in the country to accept this currency in fulfilling their financial commitments. If any of the citizens were to refuse this paper as a settlement to a debt they were owed, the law and the courts would force him to accept it; otherwise he would lose his claim and his rights.
This means that the Central Bank reserves the right to issue money that it deems necessary to implement the government’s policy. For instance, when the treasury runs out of monies that the government had levied in taxes or other, it resorts to the Central Bank and borrows from it. A loan is recorded against what it borrows and a deposit account is opened so that the treasury could withdraw what it needs to cover its expenditures. This would be considered as new money. Also, if the Central Bank deemed that there was a need for more money in the country, to lend to borrowers, it would purchase a host of exchequer bills or company securities, and it would record the value of these bills in the accounts of those who sell them, either at the Central Bank itself or in the commercial banks. This would also be new money.
An example of this is what took place in October 1987 when the share prices in New York fell by 22% in one single day. The U.S. Central Bank issued at once huge amounts of money and put it at the disposal of the banks in order to redress the effects of the shock. The Central Bank bought billions of dollars worth of bills (securities) and put these amounts at the disposal of the banks, to lend to the dealers in the stock market and ease their hardship; the system succeeded for a while in riding the storm and covering up the flaws of the usurious banking system despite rumors circulating that Citibank, one of the leading banks in New York, was about to shut down.
Issuing money by printing paper money and placing it in the government’s or in people’s accounts is also very costly, and the burden of this cost is laid upon the common people who most of the time fail to perceive its causes. This is so because the increase of the money in circulation leads to a decrease in the value of the currency; hence, one of the flaws of this system is that it always suffers from an increase in the cost of goods and services. The reality of this increase which some refer to as inflation, is that it is a reduction in the value of people’s monies and a reduction in the value of their wages and their standard of living. However, the main flaw in this system is that it is based on a confidence trick, i.e. on the deception that the paper money has a value, whereas it has no intrinsic value; however, the law of the land has imposed it by force and made it a legal tender in the eyes of the judiciary. This is why we note that when the political situation in a weak country is easily undermined and when the State’s reverence is shaken, its paper money becomes very weak and its rulers often resort to reducing the value of the currency vis-à-vis other currencies (devaluing), hoping to start afresh the confidence trick and to deceive people with regard to the value of the currency.
This is the reality of the stock markets in the West and in every country that follows and emulates the West. The stock markets are the hotbeds of the businessmen, for they do not produce any commodity that could be useful to people and there is no other incentive for the traders except a quick and easy profit. Stock markets are more like casinos than anything else. They are like cobwebs that can easily be shaken. They represent the symbol of the capitalist greed and gasping for material values. Had it not been for the Capitalist economic systems, such as the public limited companies, the usurious banking system and the inconvertible paper money, these parasitic markets would not have existed and would not have been able to survive. This is the reality of the stock markets in the West and in every country that follows and emulates the West.
The Shariah rule pertaining to this is as follows:
The public limited company system gives the public company a distinct quality of limited liability, aimed at protecting major capitalists and businessmen in case the company fails and incurs losses, in which case, those who have claims against it would not be able to demand from its investors any compensation no matter how large the personal assets of the investors are. The financial claims are only confined to what is left in the company in terms of assets. This system is contradictory to Shari’ah in every aspect. The Shari’ah rule obliges all to repay debts in full to the rightful owners, and it is forbidden to cut anything from them.
Al-Bukhari reported on the authority of Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“ مَنْ أَخَذَ أَمْوَالَ النَّاسِ يُرِيدُ أَدَاءَهَا أَدَّى اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، وَمَنْ أَخَذَ يُرِيدُ إِتْلاَفَهَا أَتْلَفَهُ اللَّهُ ”
“He who takes money from people with the intention of paying it back Allah will pay on his behalf, and he who takes it with the intention to waste it Allah will waste him.“
Ahmed also reported on the authority of Abu Hurayrah who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
لَتُؤَدُّنَّ الْحُقُوقَ إِلَى أَهْلِهَا يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ، حَتَّى يُقْتَصَّ لِلشَّاةِ الْجَمَّاءِ مِنَ الشَّاةِ الْقَرْنَاءِ نَطَحَتْهَا
“You shall return the rights to their rightful owners on the Day of Judgement, even the ewe with no horns will get even with the ewe with horns by butting it back.”
Hence, the Messenger of Allah has confirmed the obligation of fulfilling one’s rights in full in temporal life, and if one does not he will do so on the Day of Judgement. This serves as a warning for those who devour people’s rights.
Shari’ah has made it an unjust act for the rich to delay the settlement of their debts. Al-Bukhari reported on the authority of Abu Hurayrah who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
مَطْلُ الْغَنِيِّ ظُلْمٌ
“The delay of the rich is unjust”
If the delay in settling the debt is unjust, what would the devouring of the rights and the non settlement of the debts be? Indeed it would be a greater injustice and would entail a graver punishment. The Messenger of Allah has taught us that the best people are those who are best when it comes to settling their debts, for Al-Bukhari reported that the Messenger of Allah said:
فَإِنَّ خَيْرَكُمْ أَحْسَنُكُمْ قَضَاءً
“Truly the best from amongst you are those who are best in settling debts.”
Therefore to restrict the settlement of debts to those who have claims against the company, only after clearance of the public company’s losses, is forbidden. Rather they should be given all that is owed to them in terms of rights or debts in full from the assets of the investors.
This is as far as granting the public companies a limited liability. As for the public limited companies themselves, they contradict the rules of companies in Islam. This is so because the public company according to their definition : “A contract in which two or more persons undertake that each one of them participate in a financial project, by tendering a sum of money, thus sharing what this project yields in terms of profit or loss.” According to this definition and according to the reality pertaining to the founding of the public company or the Joint-Stock Company, it becomes clear that it is not a contract between two people or more according to the Islamic Shari’ah rules, because the contract according to Shari’ah is based on offer and acceptance between two parties. In other words it means that there should be two parties in the contract. One party assumes the offer, i.e. he initiates the offer of the contract by saying: “I enter into partnership with you” or words to this effect; and the other party expresses acceptance by saying: “I accept” or “I consent” or words to this effect. If the contract is lacking the presence of two parties and the presence of offer and acceptance, nothing can be contracted and nothing can be called a legitimate contract.
Taking part in a public company can take effect by merely buying its shares, either from the company itself or from someone who had already bought some of its shares. The partnership of the shareholder does not entail any negotiations or any agreement with the company, or with any other shareholder. What brings the public company into being from the onset and what gives it its corporeal personality, which is independent from its shareholders, is the government. It is the government who issues the “Memorandum of Association”. As for the founders, the only agreement between them is the application they filed with the
government to establish the company. When the “Memorandum of Association” is issued, the company becomes effectively in charge of its own affairs, thus it sells shares to the founders and to other people.
It is evident here that there is no contract taking place between two parties and that there is no offer and acceptance, because any person buying even a single share becomes a partner. Hence, the public company is not an agreement between two parties. It is rather a unilateral decision taken by an individual to become a partner in a company. Hence, he becomes a partner by merely buying a share in the company. Law experts in the West have interpreted this type of action as being an abidance by a contract, even if it were unilateral. According to them, it is one way of disposing of one’s will, where a person commits himself to a matter vis-à-vis another person or vis-à-vis the public, regardless of the acceptance or the refusal of the other person or that of the public. Therefore, the contract of the public company is unlawful according to Shari’ah. This is so because the contract according to the Shari’ah rules necessitates the presence of a link between the offer made by one of the contractors and the acceptance made by the other party, in a manner that bears a direct effect on what is contracted. This is not the case in the public company contract.
The reality of the public company contradicts the reality of the company in Islam. The company in Islam is: “A contract between two or more parties, who agree to undertake a financial venture with the aim of making a profit.” It is therefore a contract between two or more parties; thus it could not be unilateral. An agreement should rather take place between two or more parties. The contract itself should be based on the undertaking of a financial transaction with the aim of making a profit. It is not fitting for the contract to be based on the mere payment of money. It is also not fitting for the aim to be just for the sake of entering into a partnership. Hence, undertaking the financial venture is the basis in the company contract.
This action should either be undertaken by all the contracting parties or at least by one of them, or by some of them on one part, with the capital of the others on the other part. The undertaking of the financial venture by the contractors or at least by one of them leads inevitably to the presence of at least one physical partner who should be party to the contract. Therefore, in every type of company in Islam, the presence of at least one physical partner is a prerequisite. It is also a fundamental element in the company’s contract. If the physical partner is present, the partnership is contracted, otherwise the partnership cannot be contracted.
This demonstrates that the public company lacks the conditions necessary for the partnership to be contracted, because those who find themselves partners in the public company are merely partners in capital and there is no physical partner; though the presence of a physical partner is essential in the contract of the company. In the public companies, partnership is concluded by the mere presence of partners in capital only. The public company assumes its activities without the presence of a physical partner. According to Shari’ah, the partner in capital, has no right to run the company, nor does he have the right to work in the company as a partner. The running of the company and working in the company is confined to the physical partner only. Partnership in the public company, it is based on the partnership of the capital only not on the partnership of persons. Hence, whoever owns more shares, has more votes and whoever has fewer shares, has fewer votes. Besides, according to Westerners, the public company has a corporeal personality that has the power of disposal. Again, according to Shari’ah, disposal can only be given to a person that has the competence of disposal. Any disposal not conducted in this manner will be considered invalid according to Shari’ah.
Hence, assigning the right of disposal for a company’s affairs to a corporeal personality is forbidden. It should rather be assigned to he who has the competence of disposal. Any disposal that is not conducted in this manner is considered invalid according to Shari’ah. Hence, assigning the disposal of a company to a corporeal personality is forbidden. It should rather be assigned to he who has the competence of disposal, and this must be a real person. Therefore, the public company is invalid according to Shari’ah. This is as far as a public limited company is concerned.
As for the shares of such companies, these are financial papers representing a share in the company at the time of purchase or at the time of evaluation. They do not represent the capital of the company at the time of establishment. The share is an integral part of the company’s entity and it is not part of its capital. The value of the shares is not unique nor is it stable. It rather varies according to the profits and losses of the company. They are not unique and fixed at all times, but they are constantly fluctuating. As for the Shari’ah rule pertaining to the dealing in these shares and in securities, whether buying or selling, it is forbidden. This is because these shares are those of a company that is unlawful according to Shari’ah. They are in fact certificates of bills which contain mixed sums from a lawful capital and unlawful profits made from an unlawful transaction. Each bill represents the value of a share, and this share represents part of the assets that belong to the unlawful company. These assets have been mixed with an unlawful transaction which Shari’ah has prohibited. Thus, it is illicit money, whose buying and selling becomes unlawful, and dealing in such money is also illicit. This is also the case for bonds, in which money is invested with interest, and so is the case for bank shares and similar, since they all contain sums of illicit money; thus their buying and selling is unlawful, because the money contained in them is illicit.
This is as far as public companies, their systems and their shares is concerned. As for usury, which is the main calamity in the Capitalist economy and other economies, Islam has forbidden it categorically regardless of the rate. The usurious money is unlawful without any shade of a doubt, and no person has the right to own such money and it should be returned to its rightful owners if they are know. Due to the atrocity of usury, Allah (swt) described those who devour it as those whom Shaitan has driven to madness by his touch.
Allah (swt) says:
ٱلَّذِینَ یَأۡكُلُونَ ٱلرِّبَوٰا۟ لَا یَقُومُونَ إِلَّا كَمَا یَقُومُ ٱلَّذِی یَتَخَبَّطُهُ ٱلشَّیۡطَٰنُ مِنَ ٱلۡمَسِّۚ ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمۡ قَالُوۤا۟ إِنَّمَا ٱلۡبَیۡعُ مِثۡلُ ٱلرِّبَوٰا۟ۗ وَأَحَلَّ ٱللَّهُ ٱلۡبَیۡعَ وَحَرَّمَ ٱلرِّبَوٰا۟ۚ فَمَن جَاۤءَهُۥ مَوۡعِظَةࣱ مِّن رَّبِّهِۦ فَٱنتَهَىٰ فَلَهُۥ مَا سَلَفَ وَأَمۡرُهُۥۤ إِلَى ٱللَّهِۖ وَمَنۡ عَادَ فَأُو۟لَٰۤئِكَ أَصۡحَٰبُ ٱلنَّارِۖ هُمۡ فِیهَا خَٰلِدُونَ
“Those who devour usury will not stand except as stands one whom Shaitan by his touch has driven to madness. That is because they say: Trade is like usury. But Allah has permitted trade and forbidden usury. Those who after receiving direction from their God desist shall be pardoned for the past their case is for Allah to judge; but those who repeat the offence are companions of the fire. They will abide therein forever.” [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 275]
Also, due to the severity of the prohibition of usury, Allah declared war against those who devour it.
Allah (swt) says:
یَٰۤأَیُّهَا ٱلَّذِینَ ءَامَنُوا۟ ٱتَّقُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَذَرُوا۟ مَا بَقِیَ مِنَ ٱلرِّبَوٰۤا۟ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤۡمِنِینَ ٢٧٨ فَإِن لَّمۡ تَفۡعَلُوا۟ فَأۡذَنُوا۟ بِحَرۡبࣲ مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِۦۖ وَإِن تُبۡتُمۡ فَلَكُمۡ رُءُوسُ أَمۡوَٰلِكُمۡ لَا تَظۡلِمُونَ وَلَا تُظۡلَمُونَ
“O you who believe fear Allah and give up what remains of your demand for usury, if you are indeed believers. If you do not, take notice of war from Allah and His Messenger; but if you turn back you shall have your capital sums, deal not unjustly and you shall not be dealt with unjustly.” [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 278-279]
As for the inconvertible paper money standard: money is described as the medium which people agreed to have represent the value of goods and services, whether this was metallic or otherwise. It is the standard by which all the goods and services are measured. The metallic standard was widely used and prevalent long before Islam. When Islam came, the Messenger of Allah adopted the use of the Dinar and Dirham as currencies, i.e. he adopted the metallic monetary standard. He made them the exclusive currencies measure by which all the goods and services were measured.
The world continued to adopt gold and silver as currency until just before the First World War when dealing in gold and silver was suspended. Then in the wake of the First World War dealing in gold and silver partially resumed. Then dealing started to diminish and eventually it was officially abolished on 15th July 1971, when the Bretton Woods standard stipulating that the dollar should be covered by gold and linked to a fixed price was cancelled. Hence, paper money became inconvertible (compulsory) and without any gold or silver cover. It also no longer acted as substitute for gold and silver and had no intrinsic value. The value of paper
money was rather derived from the law that imposed it as a legal tender. The colonial powers used it as one of the means of colonialism and they set about tampering with the world’s currencies to serve their interests. Hence, they occasioned financial upsets and caused economic havoc. They also increased the issuing of inconvertible paper money which led to a soaring of inflation and to a deterioration in the purchasing power of currencies. This was one of the factors that contributed to the shocks in the money markets.
The occurrence of these shocks in the Western world highlights the corruption of the Capitalist economic system, the public companies’ system, the usurious banking system and the inconvertible paper money standard. It also highlights the fact that the world cannot be salvaged from the malaise of the Capitalist economic system and the shocks in the money markets as long as these systems exist. The only thing which will save the world from the corruption of this Capitalist economic system, the public company system, the usurious banking system and the inconvertible paper money standard is the abolishment of this corrupt Capitalist economic system including the abolishment of the public companies system or the transformation of these companies into Islamic companies. To save the world from this malaise, the usurious banking system and the inconvertible paper money standard must be abolished and a return to the gold and silver standard initiated.
This will put an end to the horrific monetary inflation and the usurious bank loans. It will also put an end to the speculations that have caused these shocks in the money markets. The need for usurious banks will also come to an end. Therefore, the economic situation in the world will be stabilized and the financial crisis will disappear. The pretext for having money markets will also disappear and with it the economic crisis.
May Allah’s mercy and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah (saw), his family, companions and those who follow them with goodness till the Day of Judgement.
Rajab 1st 1418 AH,
16th November 1997 CE
-
Sunnah – Between Gross Misunderstanding and Practical Rejection
It is well known among Muslims that the Sunnah of Muhammad (saaws) must be believed in and adhered to. Allah Ta’ala says:
“..So take what the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you, and fear Allah, for Allah is strict in punishment.” (TMQ 59:7)
The one who rejects the Sunnah is a Kafir since it means the rejection of Wahi. The word “Sunnah” has been greatly misunderstood by some Muslims and grossly neglected by others. This article is an attempt to convey the correct concept of Sunnah to those who misunderstand it and explain the importance of following it to the letter to those who neglect it.
What is Sunnah?
Sunnah, in the Arabic language, means way (tariqah). As a term, it is used by the scholars to mean different things. For example, the scholars of Usool ul-fiqh define the Sunnah as “sayings, actions, and silent approvals of the Prophet (saaws). ” Since the scholars of Usool are concerned with the legislative sources and the derivation of laws from these sources, they view Sunnah from a legislative perspective (i.e. what things related to the Prophet are used as legal evidences). Scholars of fiqh, however, use Sunnah to mean the actions performed or commands given by the Messenger of Allah that are below the Fard. In other words, the Fuqahaa’ are concerned with punishment and reward. Therefore, when the Fuqahaa’ use the word Sunnah, they refer to an action for which there is a reward if it is carried out and no punishment if it is not. It is synonymous with mandoub.
Is the Sunnah a Revelation?
It is indeed a wahi from Allah Ta’ala.
“Nor does he say aught of his own desire. It is no less than an Inspiration sent down to him He was taught by one Mighty in Power. “ (TMQ 53:3-4)
and Allah Ta’ala says,
“And if the Messenger were to invent any sayings in Our name, We should certainly seize him by his right hand, and We should certainly cut off the artery of his heart. “ (TMQ 69: 44-46)
Therefore, the sayings, actions, and silent approvals are a wahi from Allah Ta’ala. Similar to the Qur’an, the Sunnah makes things Haram and Halal. This is due to the fact that it is a wahi. As a matter of fact, most of the detailed rules that govern the Muslim’s life as an individual and as part of the society are taken from the Sunnah. Debating this will ultimately lead to the nullification of Sharia at large. The Messenger of Allah said, “Indeed what the Messenger made Haram is like that which Allah made Haram.” (Abu Dawood and At-Tirmizi) He (saaws) also said, “I left two things among you, if you hold onto them, you will not go astray: The book of Allah and my Sunnah.”( AI-Bukhari)
A Gross Misunderstanding
Due to mixing between the Sunnah as a source of legislation that must be followed and Sunnah as an action that is below the Fard, many preferable actions are made obligatory by many people. Many Muslims, for example, consider it a must to pray all Raka’as of salat ul- Dhuhr (2 or 4 Sunnah, 4 Fard, 2 Sunnah and 2 Nafil). They believe they will be punished if they do not pray all the Raka’as in that order all the time. They do not differentiate between the Fard (i.e. an action for which they would be rewarded for doing and punished for not doing) and the Sunnah (Mandub) (i.e. an action for which they would be rewarded for doing and not punished for not doing). Nor do they differentiate between the Sunnah from the fiqh point of view and the Sunnah as a source of legislation.
A similar example of not differentiating occurs with regards to growing of the beard. Some Muslims believe that it is Haram not to grow the beard and it is even worse to grow it and then shave it off, as it is abandoning the Sunnah! One can understand this position if they were of the opinion that growing the beard is Fard. However, since they hold the opinion that growing the beard is Sunnah and yet consider it a sin for shaving it off, reflects confusion over the concept of Sunnah.
Do problems arise from this understanding?
Yes. Muslims cannot perform an action with the wrong intention. Allah’s Messenger (saaws) said in the Hadith reported by AI-Bukhari: “Verily actions by intentions.” Therefore, for the action to be accepted by Allah Ta’ala, the Niyyah must be correct. Also, praying the Sunnah of Thuhr as an obligation, while it is recommended, is Haram since it is changing parts of the Deen. AI-Bukhari reported that the Messenger of Allah (saaws) said: “Whoever initiates something new in our matter [Deenj is rejected.” Also, this misunderstanding often leads to either rushing through the Salah in order to finish it or not praying at all since “there is no time.” Both results are unacceptable.
What about the other extreme?
Some Muslims do have the right understanding of the difference between Sunnah as a source of Sharia and Sunnah as opposed to Fard. They, however, take it very lightly. They only look at one side of the definition, namely that if the action is not carried out, the person will not be punished. They faiI to see the positive side of the definition, “if one carries out the action, he will be rewarded.” So when they are seen not doing Tasbeeh after Salah or not praying the Sunnah and are approached, they rush to ask “why do I have to do it? Is it an obligation?” or “I do not want to do it, it is not an obligation!” or “Am I committing Haram by not doing the Sunnah?!”
While such statements reflect a correct and clear differentiation between Fard and Sunnah, they reflect an extremely poor understanding of some basic issues, some of which are:
1. The Muslim should be constantly striving to get closer and closer to Allah Ta’ala. This is not accomplished by doing just the Fard, but also by performing other actions that will get us closer to Him (such as reading AI-Quran AI Kareem, praying the Sunnah and the Nafil, fasting the recommended days, etc.) Allah’s Messenger (saaws) said in the Hadith Qudsi that is reported by AI-Bukhari: “Allah Ta’ala said.. “There is nothing I love the most than when My ‘Abd becomes closer to Me with that which I obligated him to do. My ‘Abd keeps getting closer to Me with Nafl until I love him. When I love him, I become his hearing which he hears with, and his sight which he sees with, and his hand which he strikes with, and his leg which he walks with. If he asks Me, I will give him, and if he seeks My refuge, I will protect him.”
2. Doesn’t performing the Sunnah help us accomplish the Fard? This is something we all feel, that the more Sunnah and Nafil we do, the easier it becomes to carry out the Fard. It is almost certain that neglecting the Sunnah will impact on our performance of the Fard, such as praying Fajr, controlling ones tongue, lowering ones gaze, etc.
3. When Allah Ta’ala legislated the Sunnah, He did not do it aimlessly. It was designed to elevate the Islamic personality so as to obtain a higher level of closeness to Allah Ta’ala. Doesn’t Allah Ta’ala complement the Sahaba by saying:
“…You see them bowing and falling down prostrate, seeking bounty from Allah and His good pleasure. The mark of them is on their faces [foreheads] from the traces of prostration.” (TMQ 48:29)
4. The Messenger of Allah (saaws), who was guaranteed the highest level of Jannah, used to pray at night till his feet were swollen, would fast till the Sahaba would say he was not going to break fast, would give charity generously, recite the Qur’an constantly, do Tasbeeh extensively…, His Sahaba continued his practice. It was said that Abu Hurrairah would sleep 1/3 of the night, pray 1/3 of the night and review his Hadiths 1/3 of the night. Are we even worthy of comparison?!!
5. We should remember that our destination on the Day of Judgment might be dependent on one good deed (hasanah). This good deed might be in that Salah or that Tasbeeh or that recitation of the Qur’an! Allah Ta’ala says,
“As for the one whose scale [good deeds] is heavy, he will have a pleasant life. And the one whose scale [good deeds] is light, he will be thrown [in hell] headfirst.” (TMQ 101:6-9)
It has to be clear that carrying the Da’wah with a group or labeling oneself with a name does not guarantee one Jannah! Nor does it exempt one from the Sunnah or remove the necessity of needing the rewards of Sunnah. The active Muslims are the ones who need to constantly read the Qur’an and pray the Sunnah and Nafil the most, for this is the source of their strength and determination. Therefore, they should be the most eager to please Allah Ta’ala. We should ask ourselves, How badly do we want to please Allah? How badly do we want to go to AI-Jannah? Are we doing what it takes? These are but a few things to ponder over.
Ar-Raya Magazine, November 1995
-
Q&A: The Angels Harut and Marut in Surat Al-Baqara
Bismillah Al-Rahman Al-Raheem
Q&A: The #Angels Harut and Marut in Surat Al-Baqara. (Translated)
To: Ustadhi Kamsokole
=======#Question: Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh
First, I would like to make duaa to you and congratulate you for the hard work you are doing in developing this Dawah work.
My question is regarding Surat Al-Baqara verse 102 (02: 102) the verse is long and I will not repeat writing it. I will ask about what is contained in this verse:
a) Are Harut and Marut angels? Or are they from mankind with angelic qualities? There are sheikhs who say that they are people who have great knowledge, according to the meaning of the Arabic language. And if they are angels, how did they communicate with the humans at that time?
b) The Qur’an says,
(وَلَكِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ كَفَرُوا يُعَلِّمُونَ النَّاسَ السِّحْرَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ عَلَى الْمَلَكَيْنِ بِبَابِلَ هَٰرُوتَ وَمَٰرُوتَ)
“… but the devils disbelieved, teaching people magic and that which was revealed to the two angels at Babylon, Hārūt and Mārūt” [Al-Baqara: 102]
c) What did Harut and Marut bring or what was brought down to them? ﴿وَمَا يُعَلِّمَانِ مِنْ أَحَدٍ حَتَّى يَقُولَا إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ فِتْنَةٌ فَلَا تَكْفُرْ﴾ “But they [i.e., the two angels] do not teach anyone unless they say, “We are a trial, so do not disbelieve [by practicing magic].” [Al-Baqara: 102]
Can we say that these angels have been sent from heaven to teach people witchcraft?
Wa Alaikum Assalam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh:
The answer to your questions is mentioned in the book, Al-Tayseer fi Usul Al-Tafsir – Interpretation of Surat Al-Baqara for the verses: (101-103), and if you do not have the book, I will quote it to you below:
[The book “Interpretation of Surat Al-Baqarah”, page 119-125, Word file:
Interpretation of the Allah’s (swt) saying:
[(وَلَمَّا جَاءَهُمْ رَسُولٌ… لَوْ كَانُوا يَعْلَمُونَ)
“And when a #Messenger came to them…if only they knew” (101-103)
(وَلَمَّا جَاءَهُمْ رَسُولٌ مِنْ عِنْدِ اللَّهِ مُصَدِّقٌ لِمَا مَعَهُمْ نَبَذَ فَرِيقٌ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ كِتَابَ اللَّهِ وَرَاءَ ظُهُورِهِمْ كَأَنَّهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ * وَاتَّبَعُوا مَا تَتْلُو الشَّيَاطِينُ عَلَى مُلْكِ سُلَيْمَانَ وَمَا كَفَرَ سُلَيْمَانُ وَلَكِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ كَفَرُوا يُعَلِّمُونَ النَّاسَ السِّحْرَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ عَلَى الْمَلَكَيْنِ بِبَابِلَ هَارُوتَ وَمَارُوتَ وَمَا يُعَلِّمَانِ مِنْ أَحَدٍ حَتَّى يَقُولَا إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ فِتْنَةٌ فَلَا تَكْفُرْ فَيَتَعَلَّمُونَ مِنْهُمَا مَا يُفَرِّقُونَ بِهِ بَيْنَ الْمَرْءِ وَزَوْجِهِ وَمَا هُمْ بِضَارِّينَ بِهِ مِنْ أَحَدٍ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ وَيَتَعَلَّمُونَ مَا يَضُرُّهُمْ وَلَا يَنْفَعُهُمْ وَلَقَدْ عَلِمُوا لَمَنِ اشْتَرَاهُ مَا لَهُ فِي الْآخِرَةِ مِنْ خَلَاقٍ وَلَبِئْسَ مَا شَرَوْا بِهِ أَنْفُسَهُمْ لَوْ كَانُوا يَعْلَمُونَ * وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا وَاتَّقَوْا لَمَثُوبَةٌ مِنْ عِنْدِ اللَّهِ خَيْرٌ لَوْ كَانُوا يَعْلَمُونَ)
“And when a messenger from Allāh came to them confirming that which was with them, a party of those who had been given the Scripture threw the Scripture of Allāh [i.e., the Torah] behind their backs as if they did not know [what it contained] * And they followed [instead] what the devils had recited during the reign of #Solomon. It was not Solomon who disbelieved, but the devils disbelieved, teaching people magic and that which was revealed to the two angels at Babylon, Hārūt and Mārūt. But they [i.e., the two angels] do not teach anyone unless they say, “We are a trial, so do not disbelieve [by practicing magic].”1 And [yet] they learn from them that by which they cause separation between a man and his wife. But they do not harm anyone through it except by permission of Allāh. And they [i.e., people] learn what harms them and does not benefit them. But they [i.e., the Children of Israel] certainly knew that whoever purchased it [i.e., magic] would not have in the Hereafter any share. And wretched is that for which they sold themselves, if they only knew * And if they had believed and feared Allāh, then the reward from Allāh would have been [far] better, if they only knew” [Al-Baqara: 101- 103].
Allah (swt) clarifies in these verses the following:
1- The Jews opposed the Messenger of Allah (saw) and they challenged him with the Torah in which they questioned him from the Torah, asking the Messenger (saw) about the soul, the people of the cave and Zhul-Qarnain. The Messenger of Allah (saw) used to answer them by what Allah (swt) has revealed to him from the #Quran.
Moreover, the Messenger (saw) used to expose the ways they would twist and distort, such as their distortion of the stoning of the adulterer and the #distortion of the description of the Messenger (saw) that came in the Torah, which was the revelation of Messenger of Allah (saw) confirming what was indicating by the Torah. Once they found that the outcome of the challenge using the Torah was not how they wished, they turned away from it and discarded it behind their backs
(كَأَنَّهُمْ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ)
“as if they don’t know”, i.e. their #rejection of the Torah was from those who do not believe in it and did not know the truth that came with it, including the description of the Messenger of Allah (saw). This indicates the extreme reluctance to accept what was in the Torah of the signs of the #Prophethood of the Messenger of Allah (saw). They were reluctant with #awareness!
When they failed to show their opposition to the Messenger of Allah (saw) with the Torah, they began looking for other issues in sources other than the Torah to challenge the Prophet (saw) with.
2- When Allah (swt) revealed to His Messenger that Suleiman was a #Prophet,
(إِنَّا أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ كَمَا أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَى نُوحٍ وَالنَّبِيِّينَ مِنْ بَعْدِهِ وَأَوْحَيْنَا إِلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالأَسْبَاطِ وَعِيسَى وَأَيُّوبَ وَيُونُسَ وَهَارُونَ وَسُلَيْمَانَ وَآتَيْنَا دَاوُودَ زَبُورًا)
“We have sent Thee inspiration, As we sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma’il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Suleiman, and to David we gave the Psalms.” [Surah An-Nisaa’ 4:163].
The Jews stated that Suleiman was a magician and he was not a prophet; then they collected the books that the #magicians wrote with the help of the Shayateen at the time of Suleiman (as). They were spread between their hands in Madinah and they said that these are the books that Suleiman judged by. They followed them and they made these books the material with which to argue with the Messenger of Allah (saw)
(وَاتَّبَعُوا مَا تَتْلُو الشَّيَاطِينُ عَلَى مُلْكِ سُلَيْمَانَ)
“And they followed that which the Shayateen recited at the time of Suleiman.”
(مَا تَتْلُو الشَّيَاطِينُ)
; what the Shayateen recited or what they whispered to the magicians to write in their books,
(يُوحِي بَعْضُهُمْ إِلَى بَعْضٍ زُخْرُفَ الْقَوْلِ غُرُورًا)
“inspiring each other with flowery discourses by way of deception” [Surah Al-Ana’m 6:112]
The Shayateen before Islam used to listen to the heavens and mix with it several kinds of lies and reveal it to their associates. RasulAllah (saw) said,
«فَيَسْتَخْبِرُ بَعْضُ أَهْلِ السَّمَاوَاتِ بَعْضًا حَتَّى يَبْلُغَ الْخَبَرُ هَذِهِ السَّمَاءَ الدُّنْيَا فَتَخْطَفُ الْجِنُّ السَّمْعَ فَيَقْذِفُونَ إِلَى أَوْلِيَائِهِمْ وَيُرْمَوْنَ بِهِ فَمَا جَاءُوا بِهِ عَلَى وَجْهِهِ فَهُوَ حَقٌّ وَلَكِنَّهُمْ يَقْرِفُونَ فِيهِ وَيَزِيدُونَ»
“Then the dwellers of heavens seek information from them until this information reaches the heaven of the world. In this process of transmission, the Jinn snatches what he manages to overhear and he carries it to his associates.
And when the angels see the Jinn they attack them with meteors. If they narrate only which they manage to snatch that is correct, but they embellish it with lies and make additions to it.” The Jinn have been forbidden from eavesdropping after Islam,
(وَأَنَّا كُنَّا نَقْعُدُ مِنْهَا مَقَاعِدَ لِلسَّمْعِ فَمَنْ يَسْتَمِعْ الآنَ يَجِدْ لَهُ شِهَابًا رَصَدًا)
“We used, indeed, to sit there In (hidden) stations, to (steal) a hearing; but any who listen Now will find a flaming Fire watching Him In ambush.” [Surah Al-Jin 72: 9] As for
(عَلَى مُلْكِ سُلَيْمَان)
it means at the time of Suleiman (as).
3- These magician’s books were written in two ways:
• First: Whispers of the Shayateen of #magic.
• Second: What was taught by the angels of Harut and Marut to the people; Allah (swt) sent them in Babylon, teaching the people of magic and warning them not to practice it.
They informed the people that they both are a Fitna and a test for them
(وَمَا يُعَلِّمَانِ مِنْ أَحَدٍ حَتَّى يَقُولاَ إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ فِتْنَةٌ فَلاَ تَكْفُرْ)
“but neither of these two (angels) taught anyone (such things) till they had said, “We are for trial, so disbelieve not (by learning this magic from us).” And Allah (swt) revealed in this land the good and the evil to test his slaves, evil and good;
(وَنَبْلُوكُمْ بِالشَّرِّ وَالْخَيْرِ فِتْنَةً)
“and we test you by evil and by good by way of trial.” [Surah Al-Anbiya 21: 35]
And the teaching of magic to people was as a test for them; the one who learns magic and practices it will be Kafireen, and the one who doesn’t believe nor practice it will be safe
(إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ فِتْنَةٌ فَلاَ تَكْفُرْ)
“We are for trial, so disbelieve not (by learning this magic from us).”
4- Allah (swt) exonerated His Prophet Suleiman (as) from the lying and defamation of the Jews. Suleiman (as) wasn’t a Kafir, and it is elaborated that he was neither a magician nor a believer of witchcraft and thus he is not a Kafir. He is the prophet of Allah (as)
(وَمَا كَفَرَ سُلَيْمَانُ)
“And Suleiman did not disbelieve” i.e.
he was not a magician nor a believer in witchcraft to be a Kafir! This significance was appointed because the Jews accused Suleiman (as) that he was a magician: – “Ibn Jareer narrated from Shaher bin Hawshab that he said; the Jews said, “Look at Muhammad he is mixing the truth with the falsehood, he mentions Suleiman with the #prophets, but he was a magician and used to ride the wind.”
Therefore, Allah (swt) answered them and said;
(وَمَا كَفَرَ سُلَيْمَانُ)
“And Suleiman did not disbelieve” i.e.
he was not a Magician, but the metaphorical use of Kafir in this verse indicates the one who believes in magic and practices it, will be Kafir, according to the language of the Arabs, as we mentioned.
Thus, Suleiman did not became a Kaffir, but the Shayateen were Kafireen
(وَمَا كَفَرَ سُلَيْمَانُ وَلَكِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ كَفَرُوا يُعَلِّمُونَ النَّاسَ السِّحْرَ وَمَا أُنزِلَ عَلَى الْمَلَكَيْنِ بِبَابِلَ هَارُوتَ وَمَارُوتَ وَمَا يُعَلِّمَانِ مِنْ أَحَدٍ حَتَّى يَقُولاَ إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ فِتْنَةٌ فَلاَ تَكْفُرْ)
“Suleiman did not disbelieve, but the Shayatin disbelieved, teaching men magic and such things that came down at Babylon to the two angels, Harut and Marut, but neither of these two (angels) taught anyone (such things) till they had said, “We are for trial, so disbelieve not (by #learning this magic from us).”
5- The magic is displaying something in a way other than its reality, illusion, and this sense is coming from the verse
(سَحَرُوا أَعْيُنَ النَّاسِ)
“They bewitched the eyes of the people.” [Surah Al-Araef 7:116].
(يُخَيَّلُ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ سِحْرِهِمْ أَنَّهَا تَسْعَى)
“then behold their ropes and their rods -so it seemed to him on account of their magic – begin to be in lively motion!” [Surah Taha 20: 66] which mean the reality of the stick remains a stick, but for the onlooker it appears as a snake by illusion.
It was stated by Al-Jawahiri in the book, The #Language (al-Lugha): the magic is the spellbinding and everything that can be spellbound easily and exactly is magic; for example, when you perform magic in front of a boy, it means that you have tricked him. The magic was mentioned in the collection of the Arabs in the sense of the torment and severity in bewildering and lying, about which the poet said,
أعوذ بربي من النافثات من عضة العاضة المُعِضة
I seek refuge in my Lord from the sorcery from the torment of the tormentor.
The magic, in the sense of concealment, was used by Arabs as well; whereas, the magician is performing with secrecy. As for, what is the magic, they are skills that enable the magician to deceive the eyes of the people to see things as an illusion, other than reality. However, the reality does not change, in the sense that it does not nullify the reality; for example, if someone grabbed the snake that appears from the stick, he will confirm that it is a stick. So when the magicians threw their rods they were seen as sticks. However, they #bewitched the eyes of the people so as to make them appear as snakes. And when Moses (as) threw his stick, the magicians saw that it became a real snake. It was not a stick for it then swallowed up their rods, overturning the reality. They realized that this is not magic because magic does not nullify the reality. Therefore, they realized that it was not magic, rather it is Haq from the Lord of the Worlds as was said by Moses (as) and they believed strongly.
6- And
(وَاتَّبَعُوا مَا تَتْلُو الشَّيَاطِينُ)
“They followed what the Shayatin (devils) gave out (falsely of the magic)” and
(وَلَكِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ كَفَرُوا يُعَلِّمُونَ النَّاسَ السِّحْر)
“but the Shayatin disbelieved, teaching men magic” shows that the magic is reciting the words of Kufr. This means that the magic is a skill being executed by using the words of Kufr in its procedures or determinations. Other than this is not what is called magic as mentioned in this Ayah. Such as making matters appear as other than their reality, using trickery – such as fast hands or the like – or employing speech which is not kufr to give an illusion to the people, making things appear as they are not – as some charlatans do, including circles of elders. This is not the magic as mentioned in the Ayah.
7- The punishment of the performer of magic, as we have clarified, is death for it is the punishment of the Murtad (apostate). He is a Kafir as previously mentioned. The Companions (ra) have punished the magician by death. Hafsa, the mother of believers, (ra) ordered the killing of a sorceress once it was confirmed that she performed magic.
As for what was narrated that Uthman (ra) objected to what Hafsa did; that objection was because she did that without his permission as a Khalifah of the #Muslims. However, he did not deny the ruling of death for the magician. Similarly, in the time of Umar (ra) he killed the magician, i.e. it is the consensus of the companions over the ruling because it was a significant matter that happened in front of them without any denial. Ahmad narrated from Sufiyan from the son of Muawiya, uncle of Al-Ahnaaf bin Qays that he said, “We received a letter from Umar a year before his death to kill every magician, male or female.”
As for what we have mentioned about some of the handiwork that endangers people if it is not clear to them, such as the trickery of some elders; the punishment is discretionary punishment “Ta’zeer” depending on how much harm they have done to those they deceived. It is known that the discretionary punishment in Islam could reach killing, depending on the type of the committed crime.
But the difference between the killing of “Hudood” and the killing of “Ta’zeer” is that in the first case, the killed is Murtad (Apostate from Islam). We do not pray over him and he is not to be buried in the Muslims’ cemeteries. The second case is a Muslim but he is either Fasiq or Fajir depending on the type of the crime and there is prayer over him and he should be buried in the Muslims’ cemeteries.
8-
(فَلاَ تَكْفُرْ فَيَتَعَلَّمُونَ مِنْهُمَا مَا يُفَرِّقُونَ بِهِ بَيْنَ الْمَرْءِ وَزَوْجِهِ وَمَا هُمْ بِضَارِّينَ بِهِ مِنْ أَحَدٍ إِلاَّ بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ)
“So disbelieve not (by learning this magic from us).’ And from these (angels) people learn that by which they cause separation between man and his wife, but they could not thus harm anyone except by Allah’s leave.”
Allah (swt) clarifies in this Ayah that those who learn magic and practice it are able to effect those who they act upon from the people, such as creating problems between them and their spouses which leads to divorce or separation. Allah (swt) shows an important Aqeedah matter to remove what may enter the minds of people, that the magician has the ability of Allah or he can do things against the Will of Allah. Therefore, Allah (swt) clarifies in this Ayah that nothing happens in His Dominion without His Permission, against His Will, and this is the meaning of the Will of Allah. Then nothing happens in the Dominion of Allah against His (swt) Will i.e. everything that happens is with His Permission or His Will or voluntarily (swt),
(وَمَا تَشَاءُونَ إِلاَّ أَنْ يَشَاءَ اللَّهُ رَبُّ الْعَالَمِينَ)
“But you shall not will except As Allah wills,- the Cherisher of the worlds.” [Surah At-Takweer 81:29.]
But that does not mean that it is with His consent because Allah (swt) does not accept the Kufr and the sin;
(إِنْ تَكْفُرُوا فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ غَنِيٌّ عَنْكُمْ وَلاَ يَرْضَى لِعِبَادِهِ الْكُفْرَ)
“If you reject (Allah), truly Allah has no need of you; but He likes not Kufr from His servants” [Surah Az-Zumar 39:7.]
This term has this meaning as we understood from the extrapolation of the texts, and His permission or His Will can’t be explained from the literal linguistic meaning of permission or willing, which means allowing or requesting things or satisfaction, but it is interpreted in terms of Terminology, as is known by the people of language or the people of Fiqh or the people of Usool or any of the other Uloom (fields of knowledge).
And (بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ)“With the permission of Allah” has significant and great meaning at this point, because what appears in the actions of sorcerers in front of people in terms of illusion and seeing some things that they may imagine that they are creating as Allah (swt) creates or are doing things that Allah (swt) cannot revoke. So, Allah stressed that nothing happens but with His #authorization, i.e. not against His Will but within His Will in this sense, and Allah (swt) can revoke their magic, and nothing happens in His Dominion against of His Will.
And here someone may say, “So why does Allah not invalidate their magic?!”
Allah (swt) clarifies the good from evil; and He clarifies to us that He rewards the #goodness and punishes the evil. He then lets us know that Allah can make us one nation on either good or bad;
(وَلَوْ شَاءَ رَبُّكَ لَجَعَلَ النَّاسَ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَلاَ يَزَالُونَ مُخْتَلِفِينَ)
“if your Lord had so willed, He could have made Mankind one people: but they will not cease to dispute.” [Surah Hud 11:118].
But Allah (swt) from wisdom He knows, left us to choose what we want from the evil or good and we will be recompensed over them accordingly, and some enter Paradise and some enter Hell;
(وَلَوْ شِئْنَا لَآتَيْنَا كُلَّ نَفْسٍ هُدَاهَا وَلَكِنْ حَقَّ الْقَوْلُ مِنِّي لَأَمْلَأَنَّ جَهَنَّمَ مِنْ الْجِنَّةِ وَالنَّاسِ أَجْمَعِينَ)
“If we had so willed, we could certainly have brought every soul its true guidance: but the word from me will come True, I will fill Hell with Jinns and men all together.” [Surah As-Sajdah 32:13]
Therefore, there is no place to question why Allah (swt) did not invalidate the evil of the sources. Or why Allah (swt) didn’t lead us to do the good in everything that He ordered us to do. Or why Allah (swt) did not stop us from doing the evil and do only the good…. Allah (swt) clarifies to us the good from the evil, and He left us to choose, and that is the wisdom of Allah Almighty;
(لاَ يُسْأَلُ عَمَّا يَفْعَلُ وَهُمْ يُسْأَلُونَ)
“He cannot be questioned for His acts, but They will be questioned (for theirs)”. [Surah Al-Anbiya 21: 23].
However, in all cases we must believe that nothing happens against His Almighty in the Kingdom of Allah, but with His #Permission and His Will.
9-
(وَلَقَدْ عَلِمُوا لَمَنْ اشْتَرَاهُ مَا لَهُ فِي الآخِرَةِ مِنْ خَلاَق)
“And indeed they knew that the buyers of it (magic) would have no share in the Hereafter.”
This means that all magic is evil; this is a description to what they learnt of magic,
(يُعَلِّمُونَ النَّاسَ السِّحْرَ)
and this description is significant and clear that what they are learning harms them and doesn’t benefit them, because magic is evil and does harm without benefit.
And Allah (swt) clarifies that the one that practices the magic, as we have described it, does not have any chance of the afterlife because he is an unbeliever of Allah and His signs.
(اشْتَرَاهُ مَا لَهُ) means purchased, and it has been used here meaning of a metaphor which means he took it as a career for himself.
(وَلَقَدْ عَلِمُوا لَمَنْ اشْتَرَاهُ مَا لَهُ فِي الآخِرَةِ مِنْ خَلاَقٍ)
“And indeed they knew that the buyers of it (magic) would have no share in the Hereafter” is in the meaning of the prohibition on the practice of magic.
(وَلَبِئْسَ مَا شَرَوْا بِهِ أَنفُسَهُمْ لَوْ كَانُوا يَعْلَمُونَ)
“And how bad indeed was that for which they sold their own selves, if they but knew.” It is evil that they are sold themselves to magic, and they subject themselves for the #punishment of Allah, and they wasted against the fire of hell
(مَا لَهُ فِي الآخِرَةِ مِنْ خَلاَقٍ)
“He would have no share in the Hereafter.”
(لَوْ كَانُوا يَعْلَمُونَ)
“if they but knew”
which means that if they benefit from what they learned! Because the one who knows and doesn’t benefit from it, he as if he does not know. Therefore the one who knows that the magic consequences are dire and still practices it; he is as if he does not know, and this is a significant argument in the subject, #SubhanAllah the Almighty!
The Messenger of Allah (saw) sought refuge with Allah from the non-beneficial knowledge,
«أعوذ بالله من علم لا ينفع، وقلب لا يخشع، وعين لا تدمع»
“O Allah! I seek refuge in you from the knowledge which is not beneficial, and from a heart which does not fear (You), and from desire which is not satisfied.” [Muslim].
This use is a significant argument in the subject, as we said, and it is in different place in the Book of Allah and it is used in other indications,
(أَفَلَمْ يَسِيرُوا فِي الأَرْضِ فَتَكُونَ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ يَعْقِلُونَ بِهَا أَوْ آذَانٌ يَسْمَعُونَ بِهَا فَإِنَّهَا لاَ تَعْمَى الأَبْصَارُ وَلَكِنْ تَعْمَى الْقُلُوبُ الَّتِي فِي الصُّدُورِ)
“Do they not travel through the land, so that their hearts (and minds) may thus learn wisdom and their ears may thus learn to hear? Truly it is not their eyes that are blind, but their hearts which are in their breasts.” [Al-Haj 20:46]
(إِلاَّ دُعَآءً وَنِدَآءً صُمٌّ بُكْمٌ عُمْىٌ فَهُمْ لاَ يَعْقِلُونَ)
“nothing but calls and cries: Deaf, dumb, and blind, they are devoid of wisdom.” [Surah Al-Baqara 2:171].
The one who does not benefit from his ears, as if he does not hear.
And the one who does not benefit from his eyesight, as if he cannot see.
And the one that he does not benefit from his tongue as if he does not speak.
And the one who does not benefit from his mind as if he does not make sense.
And the one who does not #benefit from his #knowledge as if he does not know.]
You will find this sufficient insha’Allah.
Your Brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah18 Ramadan 1444 AH
9/4/2023 CE -
Q&A: Casting Doubt in Lailat ul-Qadr (the Night of Decree)
Answer to Question
Casting Doubt in Lailat ul-Qadr (the Night of Decree)To: Nabil Bala’ti
(Translated)Question:
Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh
May Allah support you. Someone says that Lailat ul-Qadr is the night of the revelation of the Qur’an, and it has passed and this alleged Lailat ul-Qadr does not exist, according to him. This is the text of the article: (“As for Lailat ul-Qadr, it has come in history once and it is not repeated, it gets its qadar, i.e., its unique status because the Qur’an was revealed in it. Allah (swt) said:
[إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ]
“Indeed, We sent it [i.e., the Qur’ān] down during the Night of Decree” [Al-Qadr: 1] As for other nights that are mistakenly calculated as Lailat ul-Qadr, there is no weight to them, because no Qur’an was revealed in them so that they derive from this revelation a special qadar and status.
If someone who rejects this said: In fact, we commemorate Lailat ul Qadr since it is not repeated. So we say to him: In order for us to celebrate Lailat ul-Qadr or revive it as required by the alleged Hadith, whether we believe that it is Lailat ul-Qadr, or that it is a remembrance of Lailat ul-Qadr, it must have one known appointed time like all other acts of worship such as fasting, pilgrimage and prayer, because the Wise Legislator, when He imposed worship or its enactment, He has set for each of them a fixed known time in which there is no room for (for guessing). As for this alleged Lailat ul-Qadr, many Hadiths have been mentioned regarding determining its time, which make it a mystery among the mysteries…etc.)
Then he mentions the Hadith of Muslim and challenged it:
«يا أيها الناس! إنها كانت أُبينت لي ليلة القدر. وإني خرجت لأخبركم بها، فجاء رجلان يحتّقان معهما الشيطان، فَنُسّيتُها»
“O people, Lailat-ul-Qadr was made manifest to me and I came out to inform you about it that two persons came contending with each other and there was a devil along with them and I forgot it”. and defames it!!
Then he concludes his saying with the following: (In summary, reviving the alleged Lailat ul-Qadr, which the Messenger himself did not know a specific time for it, nor a specific shore on which the ship of assignment anchors, and considering that whoever performed it out of belief and anticipation of reward will be forgiven for his previous sins, is a subversive and destructive idea. It spreads among common Muslims nothing except hallucinations, foolishness, and concessions in the Deen.” End of his article.
Please advise us. May Allah send His Baraka upon you.
Answer:
Wa Alaikum Assalam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh,
I saw what you quoted in your question about that person who attacks Lailat ul-Qadr and said that it is a night that has passed and finished… etc. The following is for you:
First: Regarding the method of approach:
1- It is clear from the text that you quoted that its author is not disciplined by any scientific rules or legal Shariah knowledge, but rather he errs randomly and rejects the many sahih (correct) and hasan (good) Hadiths without a compelling reason except what is dictated by the illusions of his perception which he made it in his mind a fact, upon which he builds and rejects what is proven from the Messenger of Allah (saw).
2-It is also clear from this quoted article that it is an attempt to undermine the purified Sunnah of the Prophet and to cast doubt on Muslims in the narrated Hadiths of the Prophet (saw) with the claim of referring to the Noble Qur’an. This is a common approach, and it is the approach of people working to destroy Islam and fight it by fighting the purified Prophet’s Sunnah. It is the clarification of the Noble Qur’an, the clarification of its entirety, the specification of its generality, the restriction of its absolute, the attachment of a branch to its origin,etc. Defaming the purified Prophet’s Sunnah and casting doubt on the approved Hadith books is a form of defamation of the Qur’an and defamation of Islam. The call to limit reliance on the Noble Qur’an alone is an invitation that on the outside it carries mercy, and its inner side is torment.
3- It is also clear from the transmitted text that its author cast doubt on the well-known Islamic legal matters among Muslims from the time of the Prophet (saw) and his noble companions to this day. This is also a well-known approach that was adopted by the orientalists, the Western disbelievers, who delved into questioning every Muslim matter that is self-evident among Muslims, then they were followed on this path by their lackeys among the children of Muslims. They casted doubt on the system of government in Islam, jihad, and the belief in the judiciary and Al-Qada Wal Qadar… etc., in order to weaken the confidence of Muslims in their Deen and try to divert them from it and divert them from returning to it after they overthrew its state and removed its rulings from application in the lives of Muslims.
4- Accordingly, his article on Lailat ul-Qadr is not serious scientific research or a considered Shariah opinion and Ijtihad. Rather, it is a kind of misrepresentation that is forbidden, tampering with the legal texts, and mocking the Hadiths of the Prophet. Therefore, it is not worth responding to it because it is devoid of the minimum conditions of honest scientific research. If you had not sent us a question about it, we would not have been exposed to it.
Second: Evidence from the Qur’an on Lailat ul-Qadr:
The writer deceives the reader that he takes and relies on what came in the noble Qur’an, and only rejects the Hadiths mentioned regarding Lailat ul-Qadr, as he says: (“As for Lailat ul-Qadr, it has come in history once and it is not repeated, it gets its qadar, i.e., its unique status because the Qur’an was revealed in it. Allah (swt) said:
[إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ]
“Indeed, We sent it [i.e., the Qur’ān] down during the Night of Decree” [Al-Qadr: 1]. As if he suggests relying on the noble Qur’an and referring to it, but in reality it is not so.
He mentions the noble verse:
[إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ]
“Indeed, We sent it [i.e., the Qur’ān] down during the Night of Decree” [Al-Qadr: 1]. And he interprets it according to his whims in a way that serves his opinion, but he does not mention the rest of the Qur’anic texts that indicate a disagreement with his opinion. The text about Lailat ul-Qadr was mentioned in two places in the noble Qur’an, and it is understood from the two places that Lailat ul-Qadr is a renewed and recurring night:
1- Surat Al-Qadr:
[إِنَّا أَنْزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ * وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا لَيْلَةُ الْقَدْرِ * لَيْلَةُ الْقَدْرِ خَيْرٌ مِنْ أَلْفِ شَهْرٍ * تَنَزَّلُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ وَالرُّوحُ فِيهَا بِإِذْنِ رَبِّهِمْ مِنْ كُلِّ أَمْرٍ * سَلَامٌ هِيَ حَتَّى مَطْلَعِ الْفَجْرِ]
“Indeed, We sent it [i.e., the Qur’ān] down during the Night of Decree * And what can make you know what is the Night of Decree? * The Night of Decree is better than a thousand months * The angels and the Spirit [i.e., Gabriel] descend therein by permission of their Lord for every matter * Peace it is until the emergence of dawn” [Al-Qadr: 1-5]. By contemplating this surah, it becomes clear that Lailat ul-Qadr is the night in which the Noble Qur’an was revealed, and that it is not a night that has passed and finished, rather it is a night that is repeated with its virtues and the good that is in it. Before mentioning the evidence that proves this from the surah, we present a brief interpretation of the surah from Tafsir al-Nasafi:
[Tafsir al-Nasafi (4/44, numbered by al-Shamilah automatically):
[إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ]
“Indeed, We sent it [i.e., the Qur’ān] down during the Night of Decree”. The Qur’an is glorified since its revelation to Him alone was specified in exclusion of others. Its pronoun came without its apparent name as a dispension, to give it attention and raise the weight of the time in which it was sent down in. It was narrated that the whole of the Qur’an was sent down on Lailat ul-Qadr from Al-Lawh Al Mahfooz (Preserved Tablet) to the heavens, then Jibreel (as) was sending it down to the Messenger of Allah (saw) for twenty-three years. The meaning of Lailat ul-Qadr is the night of decreeing and deciding matters.
Perhaps the reason for concealing it is that whoever is seeking it is to revive it in the many nights in hope of attaining it. This is like concealing the middle prayer, His (swt) Greatest Name, and the Hour of Answer (of duaa) on Friday. It is stated in the Hadith: «من أدركها يقول: اللَّهُمَّ إِنَّكَ عَفُوٌّ تُحِبُّ الْعَفْوَ فَاعْفُ عَنِّي»“Whoever realizes it should say: Allahumma innaka ‘afuwwun, tuhibbul-‘afwa, fa’fu ‘anni (O Allah, You are Most Forgiving, and You love forgiveness; so forgive me”.[وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا لَيْلَةُ القدر]“And what can make you know what is the Night of Decree?” That is, your knowledge did not reach the goal of its virtue…] End of the narration from Tafsir al-Nasafi.
And the surah contains more than one matter that clarifies that Lailat ul- Qadr is a recurring night that coincides with that blessed night in which the Qur’an was revealed, and it is enough is His (swt) saying:
[تَنَزَّلُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ وَالرُّوحُ فِيهَا بِإِذْنِ رَبِّهِمْ مِنْ كُلِّ أَمْرٍ]
“The angels and the Spirit [i.e., Gabriel] descend therein by permission of their Lord for every matter.” The angels descend on this night, and Jibreel (as) is with them, and the Qur’an uses the present tense in a verbal sentence [تَنَزَّلُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ] “The angels descend” To denote continuity and renewal, the past tense denoting the expiry was not used. This clearly means that Lailat ul Qadr is a recurring night and that the angels descend every year on that night with Jibreel (as).
2- Allah’s saying in the first verse of Surat Ad-Dukhan:
[إِنَّا أَنْزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةٍ مُبَارَكَةٍ إِنَّا كُنَّا مُنْذِرِينَ * فِيهَا يُفْرَقُ كُلُّ أَمْرٍ حَكِيمٍ]
“Indeed, We sent it down during a blessed night. Indeed, We were to warn [mankind] * Therein [i.e., on that night] is made distinct every precise matter” [Ad-Dukhan: 3-4]. It is stated in Al-Nasafi (3/ 302): […and Lailat ul-Qadr in most of the sayings is in the month of Ramadan. Then they said: He sent it down as a whole from Al-Lawh Al Mahfooz (Preserved Tablet) to the Heavens, then Jibreel (as) brought it down at the time when the need occurred for His Prophet Muhammad (saw). And it was said: The beginning of its descent was on Lailat ul-Qadr. And the Baraka is the abundance of good because of the good and blessing that is sent down in it and the supplication is answered. And if there was nothing in it except for the revelation of the Qur’an alone, it would suffice as a blessing. [إِنَّا كُنَّا مُنذِرِينَ * فِيهَا يُفْرَقُ كُلُّ أَمْرٍ] “We were to warn [mankind] * Therein [i.e., on that night] is made distinct every precise matter” [Ad-Dukhan: 3-4].They are two resuming sentences wrapped around, explaining the answer to the oath as if it was said: We revealed it because it is our business to warn and warn against punishment, and we revealed it on this night in particular, because the revelation of the Qur’an is one of the wise matters, and this night distincts every wise matter. And the meaning of “yufraqu” that details and writes every matter of the servants’ livelihood, their Ajal (time span), and all their affairs from this night until Lailat ul-Qadr that comes in the next year. The “Hakeem” with wisdom, that is, the object of what wisdom requires, it is from the metaphorical attribution, because the “Hakeem” is the description of the owner of the matter in reality and the description of the matter Metaphorically…] End
It is also clear from these verses that Lailat ul-Qadr in which the Qur’an was revealed is a recurring night, and it suffices the saying of Allah (swt):
[فِيهَا يُفْرَقُ كُلُّ أَمْرٍ حَكِيمٍ]
“Therein [i.e., on that night] is made distinct every precise matter” which indicates without a doubt that this night in which every wise matter is differentiated repeatedly because the Qur’an uses the word “feeha yufraqu” which is a present tense verb that indicates continuity and renewal.
3- Thus, it is clearly understood from the Qur’an that Lailat ul-Qadr is a blessed night in which the noble Qur’an was revealed, and it is one of the nights of the blessed month of Ramadan; in it the angels and the Spirit descend by permission of their Lord in every matter, as every wise matter is differentiated as an order from Allah. This night has great bounty, as the virtue of good deeds in it exceeds the virtue of the work of a thousand months. Thus, it appears that the noble Qur’an declares that Lailat ul-Qadr is a recurring night, and that the honorable Prophetic Hadiths regarding Lailat ul-Qadr came confirming and affirming what came in the noble Qur’an as we explained below. If the author of the research quoted at the top acknowledges the noble Qur’an and what came in it, so there is no room for him to refute those noble Hadiths
Third: The Sunnah’s evidences of Lailat ul-Qadr
1- There are many Hadiths in the Sunnah of the Prophet, which speak of the fact that Lailat ul-Qadr is a recurring and renewed, and we mention two of them that are sufficient to indicate what is required:
a- Al-Bukhari narrated in his Sahih on authority of Abu Huraira (ra) from the Prophet (saw):
«مَنْ قَامَ لَيْلَةَ الْقَدْرِ إِيمَاناً وَاحْتِسَاباً غُفِرَ لَهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِهِ وَمَنْ صَامَ رَمَضَانَ إِيمَاناً وَاحْتِسَاباً غُفِرَ لَهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِهِ»
“Whoever established prayers on the night of Qadr out of sincere faith and hoping for a reward from Allah, then all his previous sins will be forgiven; and whoever fasts in the month of Ramadan out of sincere faith, and hoping for a reward from Allah, then all his previous sins will be forgiven.” And in another narration of Al-Bukhari on the authority of Abu Huraira, he said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
«مَنْ يَقُمْ لَيْلَةَ الْقَدْرِ إِيمَاناً وَاحْتِسَاباً غُفِرَ لَهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِهِ»“And he who passes Lailat al-qadr [Night of Decree] in prayer with faith and seeking his reward from Allah will have his past sins forgiven.” This Hadith is consistent with what is mentioned in the noble Qur’an about Lailat ul-Qadr, and it is clear from it that Lailat ul-Qadr is repeated and renewed.
b- Tirmidhi narrated in his Sunan from Aishah (ra) that she said: “I said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, what is your view if I know when the Night of Al-Qadr is, then what should I say in it?” He said: ‘Say:
«قُولِي اللَّهُمَّ إِنَّكَ عُفُوٌّ كَرِيمٌ تُحِبُّ الْعَفْوَ فَاعْفُ عَنِّي» “O Allah, indeed You are Pardoning, [Generous,] You love pardon, so pardon me (Allāhumma innaka `Afuwwun [Karīmun], tuḥibbul-`afwa fa`fu `annī).” Abu Isa said this hadith is Hasan Sahih, and in another narration of the Hadith, by Ibn Majah and others and from Aishah that she said: “O Messenger of Allah, what do you think I should say in my supplication, if I come upon Laylatul-Qadr?” He said: “Say: «تَقُولِينَ اللَّهُمَّ إِنَّكَ عَفُوٌّ تُحِبُّ الْعَفْوَ فَاعْفُ عَنِّي»
‘Allahumma innaka ‘afuwwun tuhibbul-‘afwa, fa’fu ‘anni (O Allah, You are Forgiving and love forgiveness, so forgive me) This Hadith is also completely consistent with what is in the noble Qur’an about Lailat ul-Qadr, and it is clear from it that Lailat ul-Qadr is repeated and renewed. This is how the Hadith is understood correctly, as we are commanded to follow the Sunnah as we are commanded to follow the Book.
[وَمَا آتَاكُمُ الرَّسُولُ فَخُذُوهُ وَمَا نَهَاكُمْ عَنْهُ فَانْتَهُوا]
“And whatever the Messenger has given you – take; and what he has forbidden you – refrain from” [Al-Hashr: 7].
2- The refutation of the hadith is not based on the whim of the person, or because he is ignorant of understanding its meaning, or due to a spiteful need in himself etc. Rather, the Hadith is refuted in the manner that came in the sciences of Hadith and the principles of jurisprudence, and it is explained in its section for everyone who has a heart or listens while he is present (in mind):
The Hadith is rejected in narration and meaning. The following stated in the book, The Islamic Personality Volume I on this subject:
[Conditions for Accepting the Individuals Report Khabar Al-Aahaad is accepted if it meets the acceptance conditions of the narration (riwaayah) and the knowledge about its content (diraayah). As for the acceptance conditions of the narration; they are that, the narrator of the Hadeeth must be: Muslim, mature, sane, just, truthful, accurate in what he heard and remembering the Hadeeth since he carried (heard) it until he narrated it. The scholars of the usoul and the scholars of the Hadeeth terminology had clarified the conditions of the narration in details. And the biography of the men of the Hadeeth and their narrations had shown every narrator and what he fulfills of these qualities in details.
As for the knowledge (diraayah) conditions for accepting khabar Al-Aahaad, they are that it does not contradict what is stronger (more authentic). In conclusion, if the individuals report contradicts an ayah of the Qur’aan or a mutawaatir or a mashhour Hadeeth or an illah explicitly dictated by the Qur’aan, Mutawaatir or Mashhour; the Hadeeth will not be accepted as per diraayah (after knowledge), and if it does not contradict any of those; it will be accepted. And if the Hadeeth contradicts the qyas; the Hadeeth will be accepted and the qyas will be rejected] End.
If a person is presented with a Hadith that he does not know whether to take it or reject it, then let him ask someone who has knowledge of it.
The Messenger (saw) said: »«أَلَا سَأَلُوا إِذْ لَمْ يَعْلَمُوا فَإِنَّمَا شِفَاءُ الْعِيِّ السُّؤَالُ “Could they not ask when they did not know? The cure for ignorance is inquiry” [Extracted by Abu Dawoud]
This is how the sane person who fears Allah and His Messenger does; he does not defame the Hadith or mock it; otherwise, it would be a great sin for him. Now, we will discuss a Hadith as an example of that, which the author of the article challenged or ridiculed, and the author of the article assumed this poor position:
The author of the article mocks the Hadith narrated by Muslim in his Sahih about the time of Lailat ul-Qadr and that the Prophet (saw) was shown Lailat ul-Qadr and then forgot it. He said: [How does the Messenger (saw) forget it? When Allah (swt) says:
[سَنُقْرِئُكَ فَلَا تَنْسَى * إِلَّا مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ]
“We will make you recite, [O Muḥammad], and you will not forget * Except what Allah should will” [Al-A’la: 6-7],which means that we will make you recite it and never forget it…] This person does not realize what he is saying! The verse is about the Noble Qur’an, for Allah (swt) recites the Noble Qur’an to the Messenger (saw) and He memorizes it and never forgets it. In its interpretation it states:
A- Interpretation of Al-Qurtubi (20/18)
Allah’s (swt) saying: [سَنُقْرِئُكَ] “We will make you recite” meaning the Qur’an, O Muhammad, so we will teach you it. [فَلَا تَنْسَى] “And you will not forget” meaning memorize it. [Narrated by Ibn Wahb on the authority of Malik].
And this is good news from Allah (swt); He (swt) gave the Prophet (saw) good news; He (swt) gave him a clear sign, which is that Jibreel (as) would read to him (saw) the revelation. He (saw) is illiterate and does not write or read, so he (saw) will memorize it and does not forget it.)
B- Interpretation of At-Tabari (24/ 370)
And His saying: [سَنُقْرِئُكَ فَلَا تَنْسَى * إِلَّا مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ] “We will make you recite, [O Muḥammad], and you will not forget * Except what Allah should will” [Al-A’la: 6-7].Allah (swt) says: We will recite this Qur’an to you, O Muhammad, so you will not forget it, except what Allah should will.
Then the people of interpretation differed about the meaning of His (swt) saying: [سَنُقْرِئُكَ فَلَا تَنْسَى * إِلَّا مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ] “We will make you recite, [O Muḥammad], and you will not forget * Except what Allah should will” [Al-A’la: 6-7], and some of them said: This is a message from Allah (swt) to His Prophet (saw) that He teaches him this Qur’an and preserves it for him, and He (swt) forbade him (saw) to hasten to recite it, as He (swt) said:
[لا تُحَرِّكْ بِهِ لِسَانَكَ لِتَعْجَلَ بِهِ إِنَّ عَلَيْنَا جَمْعَهُ وَقُرْآنَهُ]
“Move not your tongue with it, [O Muḥammad], to hasten with it [i.e., recitation of the Qur’ān] * Indeed, upon Us is its collection [in your heart] and [to make possible] its recitation.” [Al-Qiyamah: 16-17].
Thus, in other interpretations, the aforementioned verse is about the Noble Qur’an, and otherwise, Allah (swt) may make His Messenger(saw) forget a matter for a wisdom He (swt) knows. The text of the Hadith as in Muslim on the authority of Abu Saeed Al -Khudari, may Allah be pleased with him, said: (The Messenger of Allah (saw) observed i’tikaf in the middle ten days of Ramadan to seek Lailat-ul-Qadr before it was made manifest to him. When (these nights) were over, he commanded to strike the tent. Then it was made manifest to him that (Lailat-ul-Qadr) was in the last ten nights (of Ramadan), and commanded to pitch the tent (again). He then came to the people and said:
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّهَا كَانَتْ أُبِينَتْ لِي لَيْلَةُ الْقَدْرِ وَإِنِّي خَرَجْتُ لِأُخْبِرَكُمْ بِهَا فَجَاءَ رَجُلَانِ يَحْتَقَّانِ مَعَهُمَا الشَّيْطَانُ فَنُسِّيتُهَا فَالْتَمِسُوهَا فِي الْعَشْرِ الْأَوَاخِرِ مِنْ رَمَضَانَ الْتَمِسُوهَا فِي التَّاسِعَةِ وَالسَّابِعَةِ وَالْخَامِسَةِ
“O people, Lailat-ul-Qadr was made manifest to meand I came out to inform you about it that two persons came contending with each other and there was a devil along with them and I forgot it. So, seek it in the last ten nights of Ramadan. Seek it on the ninth, on the seventh and on the fifth”. I (one of the narrators) said: Abu Sa’id, you know more than us about numbers. He said: Yes, indeed we have better right than you. I said: What is this ninth, seventh, and fifth? He said: When twenty-one (nights are over) and the twenty-second begins, it is the ninth, and when twenty-three (nights) are over, that which follows (the last night) is the seventh, and when twenty-five nights are over, what follows it is fifth. Ibn Khallad said: Instead of the word Yahliqan (contending), he said Yakhtasiman, (they are disputing). This Hadith is narrated by Bukhari, in brief, on the authority of ‘Ubada Bin As-Samit that the Messenger of Allah (saw) came out to inform (the Muslims) of Lailat ul-Qadr. Two men from the Muslims quarrelled, He (saw) said:
«إِنِّي خَرَجْتُ لِأُخْبِرَكُمْ بِلَيْلَةِ القَدْرِ، وَإِنَّهُ تَلاَحَى فُلاَنٌ وَفُلاَنٌ، فَرُفِعَتْ، وَعَسَى أَنْ يَكُونَ خَيْراً لَكُمْ، التَمِسُوهَا فِي السَّبْعِ وَالتِّسْعِ وَالخَمْسِ»
“The Prophet (saw) said, “I came out to inform you about (the date of) the night of Al-Qadr, but as so and so and so and so quarrelled, its knowledge was taken away (I forgot it) and maybe it was better for you. Now look for it in the 7th, the 9th and the 5th (of the last 10 nights of the month of Ramadan).”
The following is stated in the explanation of the Hadith by Ibn Hajar in Fath Al-Bari:
[His saying that He (saw) came out to inform of Lailat ul-Qadr i.e., to inform the time of Lailat ul-Qadr, and His saying “talaha” with “fatha” on the “Ha” a source of “talahi” with “kasra” of “Ha” which is to quarrel and dispute. His saying (saw) “fa-rufi’at” i.e., “its knowledge was taken away (I forgot it)”, this is what is taken here, because of what Muslim explained in the Hadith of Abi Sa’id about this story. He said two men were “yahtaqinan” with shada on the “Qaf” i.e., both claiming that they are right, with them is the Shaytan, so I forgot it. Al-Qadi Ayad said in this an indication that fighting is dispraised and it is the reason for moral punishment, i.e., deprivation, that the place (of the fight) in which the Shaytan is present, the Baraka and good is taken from it.] End
By carefully examining the Hadith, it becomes clear that the Prophet (saw) did not know when Lailat ul-Qadr would be in Ramadan, so he (saw) performed I’tikaaf in the middle ten days of Ramadan seeking Lailat ul-Qadr, then he ordered the building that he had built to do i’tikaaf in it to be demolished. Then he (saw) was shown the night in which Lailat ul-Qadr is in the last ten days of Ramadan. When he (saw) wanted to inform the Muslims of its time, two men from the Muslims were diputing, so the Prophet (saw) was made to forget the night. So he (saw) ordered the people to seek it in the last ten days. The Prophet (saw) explained that the reason that made him forget is the dispute between the two men. In this is an explanation of the dangers of disputes and differences in Islam, as is shown in the explanation of the Hadith above.
Also, there is wisdom in the matter that suits the last ten days of Ramadan when there is a lack of determination, so not specifying Lailat ul-Qadr and making it in one of the nights of the last ten days pushes people to strive in the last ten days, to obtain the general good by that. Al-Nasafi aptly said in his tafser: (Perhaps the reason for concealing it is that whoever is seeking it is to revive it in the many nights in hope of attaining it. This is like concealing the middle prayer, His (swt) Greatest Name, and the Hour of Answer (of duaa) on Friday).
So, where is the problem in this Hadith, for the author of the article to reject it? And why is it not correct for the Messenger (saw) to forget what is shown to him, if that is due to a wisdom that is required?! It is clear that the author of the transmitted text neglected this reason and this wisdom to continue his objection and rejection of the Hadiths of Lailat ul-Qadr.
Thus, every Hadith is not rejected out of desire, ignorance, or hatred against Islam and Muslims. Rather, it is studied by its people and must be studied correctly, and then should be inquired about, if it is not known, as stated in the previous Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (saw):
»«أَلَا سَأَلُوا إِذْ لَمْ يَعْلَمُوا فَإِنَّمَا شِفَاءُ الْعِيِّ السُّؤَالُ “Could they not ask when they did not know? The cure for ignorance is inquiry.”
Fourth: With all of this, it becomes clear that the author of the quoted text has no share of the knowledge of the transmitted (evidences), nor does he have share of the rational (evidences), and he has knowledge of jurisprudence or the science of Hadith or in the Usul (fundamentals). He does not weigh matters with a correct scale, nor does he establish the matter on a straight path, rather it appears from his opinion that he is trying to destroy the Deen and its edifice, and casts doubt in Muslims of the origin and branches of the Deen. Had it not been for the questioner inquiry about his opinion, we would not have preoccupied ourselves with responding to his delusions. In conclusion, we ask Allah (swt) to repel the plot of the plotters against them, and to protect the Ummah from their evils, and to raise the status of the Deen and support its servants, the believers and extinguishes the fire of the kuffar, the hypocrites, and those who want to cast doubts.
Your Brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah8 Ramadan 1444 AH
30/3/2023 CE -
Decline of Ideology and Ideological Nation
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Decline of Ideology and Ideological Nation –
Understanding the term ‘Decline’ and its application in current realityThe understanding about concept of decline is important for an ideological dawah carrier. Concepts that we are attempting to build in the Ummah are integrally linked to our understanding about decline. If we do not understand decline, then we cannot build a coherent set of concepts within the Ummah. The subject of decline can be applied to many spheres. However, the decline of Ideology and Nation is the most important sphere in the subject of decline. Nevertheless, decline can also be applied to many other spheres like decline of political party, politician, economy, etc…
In order to assess whether any Ideology or Nation has gone into decline, we need to have a self-consistent definition of decline, which can be applied uniformly to all the spheres of decline. Decline is the opposite of revival; to achieve revival we must reverse the decline. Revival is defined as intellectual elevation. From our culture, we understand this to be applied to a society. Intellectual elevation is about building the thoughts on a consistent and coherent basis. Hence, all the detailed concepts related to actions that satisfy man’s instincts and organic needs must be built on a viewpoint about life, which in itself is built upon a creed. This is intellectual elevation, because each concept is justified on a primary concept, and each primary concept is built upon the creed. Therefore, revival is reflected in a specific set of concepts that the society holds, by virtue of which, it solves the problems it faces.
A society is defined according to the interests. The interests we mean here are the benefits and harms that the society legislates for itself. It establishes an authority in order to safeguard these interests, hence there must be unification on certain essential concepts such that this authority is established and obeyed. Both are critical i.e. its establishment and its obedience. From a societal viewpoint, this translates into a unification within the society about the creed, the viewpoint of life emanating from the creed, resulting in a criteria of action. When the people in the society are unified on these concepts together with a system that acts to protect the interests built upon these concepts, then we can say that this society is intellectually elevated. It is important to understand that this unification on the interests is necessary before any system can be defined and adhered to, because the sole purpose of the system is to safeguard the interests. Since the interests are built on the creed, the system is characterised by the creed. The unification on these interests will only occur if people in the society are unified on the basis upon which these interests are defined.
Madinah al Munawwarah is an adequate example to illustrate this. Prior to Islam, the people of Madinah were fragmented into three groups, the Aws, the Khazraj and the Jews. They solved their problems by a mutual balance of interests, not on a unified basis that all three groups agreed upon. After accepting Islam, Islam became the basis upon which all three accepted, although the Jews did so reluctantly. The creed of Islam was accepted and the interests were defined according to the concept of Halaal and Haraam.
Hence in any dispute, members of the society accept the authority of the state to settle the dispute. Some of the society may not be happy about the decision of the state, but will accept the judgement, built on the premise that the state is there to safeguard the creed on the basis of which the interests are defined. Hence, although they may be disagreement on the specific problem, the society is unified on the creed, the viewpoint in life and the values that emanate from the creed. And they see the state as safeguarding this basis, which surpasses, in importance, the specific dispute.
Hence, when the term the ‘basis of the state’ is used, this refers to the manifestation of the creed in terms of the viewpoint in life from which the interests are defined and enforced. The greater the unification on these concepts, the stronger the state, and greater the cohesion that will exist in the society in the event of a challenge.
If revival is the unification of the basis upon which problems are solved [1], then decline must be the questioning of the basis upon which society solves problems, and hence the basis upon which society is built. Therefore, decline will be manifested in elements of society questioning the validity, not only of the legislation but also of the basis upon which that legislation is built. The natural progression of this questioning of the basis is an erosion of the authority that is there to protect the basis, resulting in fragmentation in society and eventually the collapse of Ideology takes place.
However, two things need to be understood on Ideological Society’s decline. First, society does not decline as just like that i.e. the questioning of the basis in a society does not occur on mass level so easily. It can be noticed in any society, in general, all the members are necessarily in agreement with the basis of society. That is why, the likes of few individuals like Abdullah ibn Ubay ibn Salul whose thought were not in agreement with the basis of society in Madinah, is not indicative of decline. Similarly, a Socialist in the United States and his view of American society does not indicate the decline of America. Rather, the decline of society is triggered by an ideological challenge either by a movement/party, or a state carrying alternative ideology which will make the general masses to question the basis of society. This definition and understanding of ‘Decline’ can be applied to any nations, the nations of past and present. Let’s apply this to the Ummah of past and the present western secular capitalist society especially its leader United States of America.
Regarding the Ummah in the past, let us begin with the start of Islamic state that the Prophet (saw) had established in Madinah. The state or its basis in Madinah was never questioned even though hypocrites (munafiqeen) existed. Even some attempts taken by the munafiqeen to undermine the state by building the Masjid Diraar and its subsequent destruction by the Messenger of Allah (saw) is not indicative of decline but an attempt by subversive elements to undermine the state which were dealt with Sharii’ actions.
During the events of the conflict between Mua’wiyah (ra) and Ali (ra), the question was not the basis, or the creed, but the detailed actions of a Khaleefah on a specific issue. Hence the conflict was over a specific thought and the conflicting priorities attached to them. Mu’awiyah refused to give Ali the pledge of allegiance (bai’ah), thereby refusing to accept Ali’s authority until he settled the issue of Uthman’s (ra) assassination. Ali’s viewpoint, and rightly so, was that the murderers of Uthman will be pursued for sure according to the shari’ah rules, but considered Mu’awiyah’s refusal to give bai’ah as a separate issue and tantamount to rebellions. Neither the state, not its basis was being questioned. Indeed, the Romans offered to help Mu’awiyah, who not only refused their help, but responded with an infamous response that “if Ali (ra) sent an army to fight you, I will be on the first line to fight against you”. Though what happened between Ali and Mu’awiyah was a major political crisis, nevertheless, what was at question was an understanding or misunderstanding of priorities, not the basis of a state. Similarly, the actions of Mua’wiyah (ra) related to Yazid instituted hereditary bai’ah’. It is the issue on lack of clarity in the understanding of a specific thought and it is considered as misapplication of the one particular sharii’ rule regarding Bai’ah, but not considered as questioning the basis of state or decline of the Ummah.
These examples have been used specifically because when placed within the context of decline, it is noted that the Ummah showed great importance to the basis of Society i.e. Islamic Ideology together with its Fikrah (idea) and Tareeqah (method). Though few misunderstanding and conflict over the detailed solutions of Islam aroused, Ummah never questioned the basis of State and Society.
The closing of the doors of ijtihad would have been the final nail in the coffin, from the viewpoint of precipitating decline. It was this activity that ultimately sealed the fate of the Ummah, for the inability to return to the sources means that any misunderstanding of the thoughts cannot be rectified easily. Hence, when new problems are faced, or the creed is challenged with alternative thoughts, the ability to go back to your source provides us with the confidence that our sources can address these new problems. If we look at the motives for closing the doors of ijtihad, they were twofold. First is the fact that people were not observing the limits of ijtihad, performing liberal ijtihad. Secondly, the scholars at that time felt that the golden age of the Ulema had produced such a vast wealth of knowledge related to Islam, that it was inconceivable that there would be any major issue arising in the foreseeable future that would require a return to the sources and original ijtihad. Again, the Ummah had not declined, for the motives for closing the doors of ijtihad was supreme, even though misguided, confidence in the work of the classical scholars. Thus the basis of the system was never at question.
During the period of the Uthmani Khilafah (Ottoman Caliphate), the military might of the state was unquestionable. Even the Europeans acknowledged that, giving Suleiman al Qanuni the title Suleiman ‘The Magnificent’. If we closely examine the Khilafah at this stage, fragmentation in the political sphere had already occurred, and that there was some degree of political autonomy between the various wilayah. If we examine the conquests of the Uthmani state, we cannot compare them to the conquests of the Khulafah Ar-Rashidoon. In the European regions that the Uthmani Khilafah conquered, very few maintained their Islamic identity, after the Khilafah was destroyed. Whereas the regions which were conquered during the earlier days of Islam, maintain their Islamic identity even today and those lands form the bulk of the Islamic lands that we work in. Yet, we do not refer to this as decline, because the basis of the state was not questioned at that time. It is worth adding here that although the state was supreme, it judged itself using an incorrect criterion, which was comparing itself to the military weakness of the European nations, not a comparison in intellectual strength. If at any point at that time, a party like the Hizb had been established, then the seeds of decline sown in the past could have been easily uprooted and replaced by the pure understanding of Islam.
However, with the advent of the industrial revolution and the period of technical progress happened in Europe, the intellectual challenge came with the military and economical might. The Ummah turned it on itself where most of the movements that came to address the issues/problems of the Ummah and try to revive it, infact actually, questioned the basis of the state. The attempts to adopt elements of the Western constitutions indicate that within the political circles of the Khilafah, the system was being questioned. It is not worth going through the details of those movements as it is not the scope of this article and moreover it is well documented in the books like Takattul el-Hizbi, Structuring of a Party, by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani (Rh) [2] and other books of Hizb ut Tahrir. This period proved the point mentioned earlier above, that the questioning of the state manifested itself once a challenge to the state has been made by the presence of alternative ideology i.e. birth of secular capitalism. Indeed, this is consistent with what the party states in the book Mafaheem, Concepts of Hizb ut Tahrir, (pg.01, First para, First line) “Since the middle of the twelfth century Hijri (eighteenth century C.E.) the Islamic world has been rapidly declining from its correct position and sinking horribly to the abyss of decline………”.[3]
Why this is critical is that, the requirement is no longer just to unify the Ummah on the errors in the detailed solutions, as was the case between Mua’wiyah and Ali, but the issue becomes the unification on the basis upon which these solutions emanate. Hence, instead of convincing the Ummah about the right of adoption of the Khaleefah, the issue became the existence of the Khaleefah. Instead of convincing the Ummah about the contradiction between democracy and Islam, the issue became the liberal interpretation of Islam from its sources. Instead of convincing the Ummah about the relationship between the wali and the state, the Ummah were justifying the confederacy of states based on Islam.
Ironically, one of the reasons for closing the doors of ijtihad were to prevent people from not observing the limits of ijtihad. Yet, the consequence of closing the doors of ijtihad was the liberal interpretation of Islam that included all thoughts and concepts to be part of Islam, even though they may have contradicted Islam.
Hence, the questioning of the basis of state is the indicator of decline, because then the solutions are not adhered to, because the basis from which they emanate is being questioned. People no longer have confidence in the solutions, and those who represent these solutions in the political sphere. If we observe the above series of events, the process resulting in decline can be described as follows. Any creed manifests itself as a viewpoint of life. From this viewpoint of life emanate a series of interests which are protected by a state. These can be termed the detailed solutions related to life’s affairs.
The link between these solutions, their sources and the manner by which these solutions emanate from the creed needs to be maintained. A decay in understanding the detailed solutions will result in conflicts in society related to the specific solutions. But once the understanding of these solutions decays to an extent that their link with the sources is severed, then the basis is laid for decline.
Therefore, applying this to the Khilafah State, what occurred initially was the misunderstanding of the detailed solutions from Islam. This we commonly term as the misunderstanding of the thought and method. However, the closing of the doors of ijtihad severed that fundamental link between the sources with the solutions and the relationship between the solutions and the creed. Essentially what this means is, the Muslims did not understand why they were practicing Islam the way it was, and hence would not be able to argue the benefits of Islam from the basis. When confronted with the industrial revolution and the challenge of democracy and freedom, what criteria could they have used to judge what was acceptable from the industrial revolution and what was not? Inevitably we saw the fruits of this, such as the refusal to use the printing machine versus the adoption of democracy as from part of Islam. Hence any society that is edging towards decline will first be seen to have conflict over the detailed solutions that are implemented by it. Some of them might begin to question the basis, which will be accelerated if an ideological challenge exists.
In order to apply this definition to the decline of western society, we need to be careful about understanding the nature of secularism. First, the nature of secularism is that it adapts to include new problems, i.e., it legislates to accept a problem.
Hence, examples like homosexuality, prostitution, drugs abuse are solved by accepting the legitimacy of these actions, not by addressing the roots cause of the problems. Secondly, the nature of democratic societies is that the ruling spheres will never allow the basis of the system to be questioned, for their very existence as ruling elites is at question. The nature of democracy is that the politicians can and will easily use public opinion in order to legitimise an activity which they are incompetent of solving, hence legislate to accept the problem, not to solve it. Hence it opens up the discussion that if the nature of secularism is such that there will never be a dominant public discussion of the basis of the state, how do we really assess that a secular society is ready for an ideological challenge – that is, is the society in decay, such that it will rapidly accept another ideology if it was challenged? We witness the fact that American society is not what it was before, we can sense that there is a sense of discontentment now that was not prevalent then. How do we characterise this discontentment, or sense of uneasiness?
As mentioned earlier, the beginning of decline is the conflict over detailed solutions. Hence, over a period of time comparisons will exist between the nature of society now and before. These will begin to focus on the problems currently and compare them to the reasons of their absence in the past. I will quote an example in my field of work to understand this point. Let’s take students as an example. When we speak to many teachers, lecturers, professors in the Western society they would say that the behaviour of students now is unacceptable. The respect that lecturers had in the past has been replaced by disrespect. Though this might not be the case in the conservative and third world countries but our discussion is about the Western society especially, the US. The physical abuse of lecturers, professors and teachers, etc. is countered by legislation against threatening behaviour. Yet surely physical abuse is against the law, whether performed against a lecturer or any other individual. We would look at it from the point of view that how can a society produce individuals who do not respect these values. We would say that this is individualism. They view it as bad behaviour.
In social life, the curbing of benefits to unmarried mothers is yet another example. We would argue that what society produces such a large number (in excess of 10 million) unmarried mothers? In addition, the need to pursue fathers who do not pay maintenance to their spouses. Both examples are problems that emanate from freedom of the individual. Both are examples of rampant individualism. Again, the society does not see any harm in them but legislates to counter their disruptive behaviour. We can quote numerous examples like these to prove that decay exist in the west, and people start to question the detailed solutions of secular democratic system and started to show their dissatisfaction on the secular democratic system.
To highlight more on this, let’s see some more examples, the recent assault of the hooligan supporters of Trump upon the icon of Democracy, Capitol Hill, also represents the sorry state of Democracy and rampant individualistic mentality. The dramatic assault has exposed the false claim of those that still advocate Democracy, asserting that Democracy unites nations, allows peaceful transition of power, grants rights to all, protects the minorities, quells unrest, allows productive debate and is the pinnacle form of civilization. In the homelands of Democracy, white supremacist backed regimes are assuming power. In the standard bearer of Democracy, an unarmed Afro American citizen is choked to death by police, but the police are shy of halting a vandalizing hoard of violent white supremacists. As for the world’s largest democracy, the Hindu State, Muslims are systematically persecuted. As for the pioneer of Democracy, France, it cannot even tolerate the veil of a Muslim woman. This incident exposes the institutional failures of the Western system at all levels: Institutionalized racism, institutionalized xenophobia, institutionalized wealth inequality, institutionalized corporate interests, Institutionalized disparity of access to health care, etc. Decades of political apathy has now exploded into mistrust of the system and the breakdown of a divided society. America is a divided nation across political, economic, racial and cultural lines and is coming apart at the seams. American democracy is damaged in the eyes of its people and the world. These events give rise to increase of people questioning the detailed solutions of democratic secular capitalist ideology.
With respect to the status of leading state of Capitalist Ideology, America, in political, economic, and foreign policy, it has gone down and not in the position as it was before. Many notable thinkers have started to pen articles about the demise of Capitalism and America’s global prestige, indicating the West’s and America’s decline (on the verge of decline) in political, economic, social and foreign policy etc., such as Robert Kagan, a known neoconservative, mentioned in his book, Superpowers don’t get to retire: what our tired country still owes the world, starts by saying, “Almost 70 years ago, a new world order was born from the rubble of World War II, built by and around the power of the United States. Today that world order shows signs of cracking, and perhaps even collapsing.”
The German weekly news magazine, Der Spiegel had the cover page titled, ‘Is the American dream over?’, in it, Klaus Brinkbäumer, a writer mentioned, “The fall of America doesn’t have to be a complete collapse — it is, after all, a country that has managed to reinvent itself many times before. But today it’s no longer certain — or even likely — that everything will turn out fine in the end.” David Klion writing in this month’s Foreign Policy Magazine wrote an article titled: “The American Empire Is the Sick Man of the 21st Century”. Paul Kennedy theorizes that “America’s overseas military commitments spurred by deficit spending are indicative of America’s impending decline.”
Several books have been written on the decline of West and America by notable writers. The famous American thinker and politician Pat J. Buchanan wrote a book titled: The death of the west; How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasion Imperil Our Country and Civilization. Two authors, Patrick Artus and Marle-Paule Virard wrote a book titled Capitalism is on its way to Self-Destruction. And others books like Mediocracy by the French Canadian writer Alain Deneault and the book Decadence: The Life and Death of the Judeo-Christian Tradition by the French Philosopher Michel Onfray are also discusses the decline of west and especially America.
These books and articles expose the reality of United States of America and its weakness. However, the powers posing challenge to America like Germany, Russia and China are all rising powers within the current capitalist system and thus they have an interest in maintaining it. As a result, they will always give the Secular Capitalism a credit and will not challenge it to make it decline and collapse. Hence, they are all rising powers, within the current capitalist system and thus they don’t present alternative options for a system that would lead to the collapse of the current capitalist Ideology.
Moreover, there are some recent reports published, researchers from Cambridge University studied the political inclinations of more than 4 million people, employing data from survey projects that encompassed 154 countries between 1995 and 2020. The percentage of people that said they were disappointed with democracy during 2019 hit 57.5%. In fact, the researchers said that 2019 marked “the highest level of democratic discontent” on record. Many Western democracies, such as America, Australia, and UK, are now at their highest-ever level of dissatisfaction with democracy. According to the report, America in particular had seen a “dramatic and unexpected” decline in satisfaction with democracy. The report summed up Americans disappointment with democracy in the following way “for the US, it marks an ‘end of exceptionalism’ a profound shift in America’s view of itself, and therefore, of its place in the world.”
Even though these reports allude to the weakness of the capitalist ideology and the US, the torch bearer of Capitalism, still we cannot say that these are enough for the fall of the capitalist ideology. These points do highlight the opportunity that exists, more than before, for the rise of an alternative ideology, led by a strong state, to save the humanity from the evils of Capitalism.
However, the mere presence of challenge per se does not prove decline. Neither does the presence of multiple political and military competitors, no matter how sustained, shake a nations belief in its values unless paired with an intellectual thought. Hence, for any ideology to collapse, it is inevitable that an alternative is available for the masses to compare and opt. So that they will question the basis of Society and embrace the alternative Ideology.
Effectively, what I try to convey is that the inherent flaws in the concepts on which this society is built is rising day by day and this will eventually give rise to contradictions laying the basis of decline at future Inshaa Allah. Hence, we cannot say that American or western society is declining, but questioning the detailed solutions of the western ideology exists which can be exploited by an ideological challenge and cause them to decline and collapse very soon Insha Allah.
Decline would come about as a result of a shock. And in the case of past ideological states, this shock would combine the presence of a peer competitor in the form of a great power with an ideological alternative. We know for sure that only the rise of Islam could conceivably do this as only Islam can combine the presence of an ideological alternative with global power ambitions to spread justice. This is why the world needs Khilafah (Caliphate). History is a witness to this phenomenon. It was the rise of the Khilafah that challenged and brought a fall to the then leading state, the Roman Empire. It was the Khilafah that influenced European renaissance that led to the revolutions and new ideology. Similarly, it was the capitalist states of Britain and France that played a role in the destruction of Khilafah. Then it was the USSR that challenged the Capitalist states by adopting Communism as an ideology; and then it was the United States that led the Cold War and fall of Communism giving liberal capitalism as the alternative. In the very similar way, once such a state is established today, it can present its solutions in a challenging manner and build definitive cracks in the wall of Capitalism that is already shaken. Such a state must present the solutions covering economics, politics and legal aspects of a society and there is no available ideology other than Islam that could provide such comprehensive solutions as an alternative to Capitalism. Islam has a capacity to provide solutions based its Ideology for the Political, Economic, Legal, and social aspects.
Hence, this current status quo and the reality of the international situation should motivate us as a Shaab (member) of political Hizb, whose ideology is Islam, should work hard and give our best without showing any slackness of commitment in Dawah, be aware of the gravity and importance of the task we work for, not occupied with our own worldly matters, to the degree that the dawah became secondary or marginal in our life, in order to re-establish the strong, mighty Khilafah state which will pose the ideological challenge to the current Capitalist society and deliver all the people out of darkness to the light and justice of Islam.
May Allah (swt) make it soon and bless us to witness the victory of Islam reaching all the corners of the globe.
The Messenger of Allah (saw) said,
«لَيَبْلُغَنَّ هَذَا الْأَمْرُ مَا بَلَغَ اللَّيْلُ وَالنَّهَارُ وَلَا يَتْرُكُ اللَّهُ بَيْتَ مَدَرٍ وَلَا وَبَرٍ إِلَّا أَدْخَلَهُ اللَّهُ هَذَا الدِّينَ بِعِزِّ عَزِيزٍ أَوْ بِذُلِّ ذَلِيلٍ عِزًّا يُعِزُّ اللَّهُ بِهِ الْإِسْلَامَ وَذُلًّا يُذِلُّ اللَّهُ بِهِ الْكُفْرَ»
“This matter will certainly reach every place touched by the night and day. Allah will not leave a house or residence but that Allah will cause this religion to enter it, by which the honorable will be honored and the disgraceful will be disgraced. Allah will honor the honorable with Islam and he will disgrace the disgraceful with unbelief.” [Musnad Aḥmad]
References:
1. An-Nahdah-Revival by Shiekh Haafiz Saleh [Fareed Muhammad Saalih AL-Ghaanim (RH)]
2. Structuring of a Party (Attakatul el-Hizbi) by Taqiuddin an-Nabhani (RH), Al Khilafah Publications, 1422 Hijri/2001CE.
3. Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir (Mafahim Hizb ut -Tahrir) by Taqiuddin an-Nabhani (RH), Khilafah Publications.
4. https://newrepublic.com/article/117859/superpowers-dont-get-retire
5. https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/a-superpower-in-decline-is-the-american-dream-over-a-726447.html
6. David Klion, “The American Empire Is the Sick Man of the 21st Century,” Foreign Policy (blog), 2 April 2019, https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/04/02/the-american-empire-is-the-sick-man-of-the-21st-century/
7. https://cheirif.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/paul-kennedy-the-rise-and-fall-of-the-great-powers-19891.pdf
8. The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization, by Patrick J. Buchanan, St. Martin’s Press, 2002
9. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58086422-la-derni-re-chance-du-capitalisme
10. https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/41438227-mediocracy
11. Decadence: The Life and Death of the Judeo-Christian Tradition), Flammarion, 2017 -
Islam and technology – Is Islam anti-technology?
Living in a material world, one confusion which arises amongst some people is that how, on the one hand democracy, capitalism and the policies of the west are kufr and yet we still use their technologies such as the internet, mobile phones and cars. Is this not haram? Additionally, some condemn the Khilafah as being regressive or anti-technological. Former US assistant secretary of state, James Rubin said in an interview, “Muslim resentment of the West will evaporate when they are free and fed”, he continued, “Do you really want to live in Bin Laden Land, a Stone Age Islamic caliphate with no rights, no economy and no future? I am confident the answer will be no.” Is James Rubin right, or does Islam have something to say on the ‘technological revolution’?
There is a difference between haDarah (civilisation) and madaniyyah (material progress). Material objects arising from the haDarah are specific to a civilisation and define a particular outlook towards life. Hence a statue such as those being worshipped by the Quraysh, or in contemporary times such as those being worshipped by Hindu, epitomise something which represents a particular ideological viewpoint. To make use of these objects which represent a foreign haDarah to the Islamic one is haram as it contradicts the Islamic outlook on life.
However, madaniyyah is not specific to any civilisation and is universal. Material aspects arising from science and its advancement or from industry and its evolution are not specific to any particular civilisation or ideology. Consequently mobile phones, laptops and the internet all stem from scientific enquiry which is universal to man and not limited to the west alone. Hence it is wrong to equate technology or science as something which may be ‘Western’ or ‘kufr’.
This distinction should be very clear and at the forefront of our minds. Whilst we may adopt from the Western madaniyyah those things which arise from science, industry etc. we must never adopt from her haDarah.
Hence using a car to go and buy a computer is allowed whilst bringing home a statue of an idol to adorn pride of place on your mantelpiece is not. In the first instance a computer does not represent any particular ideological outlook or view whilst in the later example a statue typifies shirk, something which runs totally counter to the Islamic aqeedah.
A final point worth reflecting on is that, madaniyyah alone is no adequate benchmark by which to assess any civilisation. Each and every civilisation can expect to make material progress over time. Consequently penicillin could have just as easily been discovered in China or Nigeria or Bahrain as it was in the West. Unfortunately some Muslims have become smitten with the western madaniyyah and have consequently condemned Islam as being ‘backward’ or anti-technological. Clearly this is not the case and Islam does not oppose technology or industry as such. When we examine the Western civilisation we must pull back from examining her madaniyyah and instead, assess the intellectual basis of her civilisation; capitalism, secularism and freedom.
Regarding holidays, ceremonies, festivals etc:
“To every people We have appointed rites and ceremonies which they must follow: let them not dispute with you on the matter, but you do invite (them) to your Lord: for you are assuredly on the Right Way” [TMQ: 22:67]
It is reported that Anas Bin Malik (ra) said; “When the Prophet (saw) came to Medina, the people had two holidays from the days of Jahiliyyah. He (saw) said, “When I came to you, you had two holidays you used to celebrate in jahiliyyah. Allah has replaced them for you with better days, the day of Fitr and the day of slaughter (Adha).”
“Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” Narrated by Abu Dawood, 3512; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani.
In Islamic thought, a ‘people’ (Muslim and non-Muslim) are composed of two parts, first is the hadarah (civilization) and the second is the madaniyyah (progress). The hadarah includes aspects of the people’s civilization, i.e. their laws, belief-systems, ideologies, systems governing interactions (such as economics) etc, and the madaniyyah refers to a people’s material progress in terms of technology, administration, wealth, etc. As Muslims, we are free to adopt from the madaniyyah of Kaafirs, but NOT from the Kaafir hadarah – which would basically equal Kufr, or in some cases, Shirk. Furthermore, we cannot adopt things from the Kaafir madaniyyah if it contradicts and/or is alien to the Islamic hadarah, for example, earning money from derivatives, interest, free-floating exchange, etc, is forbidden.
Things such as holidays, ceremonies, festivals, etc, come from the hadarah, and therefore, we Muslims are not permitted to celebrate them as they come from the Kaafir hadarah. Hence, there is no room for ‘neutrality’ in terms of holidays, interactions, policies, etc; in these areas you are obliged to follow Islam exclusively. A quick look into the life of the Prophet (SAW), he used physical tools that were from the Persians – such as the trench – because it was from the Persian madaniyyah, and had nothing to propagating their hadarah (or contradicting Islam’s). However, you’re not going to find a single case of him celebrating a holiday other than the ones sanctioned by Allah SWT. To even claim that certain holidays are secular or neutral – such as New Years – is to establish a hadarah in which we’re claiming that there is a space where Allah SWT doesn’t cover in His laws (without evidence from Quran and Sunnah).Nope. Actual clothing in and of itself is pure madiniyyah, the Prophet (SAW) and Sahaba themselves wore foreign origin clothing at times. It’s only hadarah if it begins to (1) violate the Islamic dress code or hijab for both men and women or (2) if we’re talking about clothing that symbolizes the Kuffar hadarah. For the first example, I can’t wear jeans/pants that show parts of my body that I am not allowed to show, such as the intimate parts. For the second example, I can’t dress with the Bishop’s collar, or Jew’s hat, etc…anything that the Kuffar themselves think to symbolize a part of their hadarah. In other cases, we can wear whatever as long as we don’t violate the Hijab or symbolize the kufr hadarah.
-
The United States – A Case Study of the Non-Existent Democracy
Introduction
Democracy is defined as the freedom possessed by a people which bestows upon them the right of self-legislation according to what they deem fit. In other words, it is the “rule of the people, by the people, for the people.” The ability to determine how to rule and what laws to enact translates to sovereignty. In democracies, sovereignty belongs to the people. Human beings reserve the right to legislate, formulate policies, and set up societal orders based on their likes and dislikes, regardless of how these likes and dislikes are determined: either through rational arguments and the intellect, or religious beliefs and rituals, or sentimental inclinations and attachments, etc.
Capitalism is the economic system and most dominant factor of the Western ideology. This ideology is based on the creed of Secularism-the separation of Church and State. The fundamental idea behind Secularism is that human beings are free from obedience to Divine laws and regulations in terms of how they should conduct their lives. In other words, human beings cannot be restricted by the commands of a Divine entity. Rather, the ability to formulate laws, rules, systems, regulations, canons and constitutions which determine how they should behave as individuals and as societies is the human being’s sole prerogative. Although, secularism initially resulted from the struggle between the Church and ‘heretic’ medieval philosophers, it is not restricted to distancing Christianity from the affairs of human beings. Rather, it restricts any Divine way of life to merely personal beliefs of individuals, depriving this way of life from regulating the temporal affairs of humans. For argument’s sake, if Islam can be secularized to an exclusively spiritual, ritualistic and personal belief from its correct form as a comprehensive spiritual-political ideology, then this mutilated form can be easily accommodated within the room allowed to ‘religions’ in a secular society. The Capitalist system is the practical manifestation of the Secularist idea, i.e., a system which human beings formulated because they accepted the fact that it is their right to produce such a system. For sake of discussion, we will refer to the Western ideology as Capitalism since it constitutes its driving force and major component.
Although Democracy was not born in the United States, the US is the de facto leader and upholder of democracy around the world. It portrays this image both to those who live under its sovereignty and to those beyond its borders. Its people are taught that democracy and freedom are essential values that no civilized society can live without. Loyalty to democracy, liberty and freedom is entrenched and engraved in the minds of its citizens from a very early age. This ideological attachment continues to be fostered and nurtured throughout their lives to such an extent that any society not possessing these values is deemed as a society not worthy of living in. The United States is also one of the leaders of the Capitalist world, embracing and applying the ideology of Capitalism. The ideas of freedom to private enterprise, freedom to own property, freedom of expression and freedom of belief are fundamental values cherished by its people and carried by the state. Thus, democracy and Capitalism are essential grassroots ideas in the American society at large.
This article shows that democracy as a system – specifically in the US – is dominated by Capitalism. Furthermore, intrinsically speaking, democracy alone cannot and does not possess the ability to function as an independent system especially when Capitalism is the economic system of the society. Rather, as observed in ‘democratic’ states such as the US, democracy is subjected to and is dominated by the system of Capitalism which renders democracy a secondary or non-existent system. Thus the sovereignty of the people under democracy remains a myth. In fact this sovereignty belongs to a very small group within the society: the Capitalist elite.
Democratic Origins?
Democracy and freedom are considered two fundamental ideas that formed the basis for the creation of the United States. Many believe that the “founding fathers” – those responsible for the birth of the nation – were struggling for the implementation of these core ideas so that every individual would live in peace and happiness. However, their background and what they worked for was something very different.
“By 1700 there were fifty rich families in Virginia, with wealth equivalent to 50,000 pounds ( a huge sum those days), who lived off the labor of black slaves and white servants, owned the plantations, sat on the governor’s council, served as local magistrates. In Maryland, the settlers were ruled by a proprietor whose right of total control over the colony had been granted by the English King…
In the Carolinas, the Fundamental Constitutions were written in the 1660s by John Locke, who is often considered the philosophical father of the Founding Fathers and the American system. Locke’s constitution set up a feudal-type aristocracy, in which eight barons would own 40 percent of the colony’s land, and only a baron could be a governor…
The leaders of the early Boston were gentlemen of considerable wealth who, in association with the clergy, eagerly sought to preserve in America the social arrangements of the Mother Country. By means of their control of trade and commerce, by their political domination of the inhabitants through church and Town Meeting, and by careful marriage alliances among themselves, members of the little oligarchy laid the foundations of an aristocratic class in the seventeenth century Boston… (Zinn 47)
“By the years of the Revolutionary crisis, the 1760s, the wealthy elite that controlled the British colonies on the American mainland had 150 years of experience, had learned certain things about how to rule. They had various fears but also had developed tactics to deal with what they feared.” (Zinn 53)
Those upper classes, to rule, needed to make concessions to the middle class, without damage to their own wealth or power, at the expense of slaves, Indians, and poor whites. This bought loyalty. And to bind that loyalty with something more powerful even than material advantage, the ruling group found, in the 1760s and1770s, was a wonderfully useful device. That device was the language of liberty and equality, which could unite just enough whites to fight a Revolution against England, without ending either slavery or inequality… (Zinn 58)
“The men who engineered the revolt were largely members of the colonial ruling class.” George Washington was the richest man in America. John Hancock was a prosperous Boston merchant. Benjamin Franklin was a wealthy printer. And so on. (Zinn 84)
Far too many consider the Constitution as a work of genius put together by wise, humane men who created a legal framework for democracy and equality. In reality, as Charles Beard, a twentieth century historian, wrote in his book “The Economic Interpretation of the Constitution”:
In as much as the primary object of a government, beyond the mere repression of physical violence, is the making of the rules which determine the property relations of members of society, the dominant classes which rights are thus to be determined must perforce obtain from the government such rules as are consonant with the larger interests necessary to the continuance of their economic processes, or they must themselves control the organs of government. (Zinn 89)
Thus, Beard found that most of the makers of the Constitution had some direct economic interest in establishing a strong federal government: the manufacturers needed protective tariffs; the moneylenders wanted to stop the use of paper money to pay off debts; the land speculators wanted protection as they invaded Indian lands; slaveowners needed federal security against slave revolts and runaways; bondholders wanted a government able to raise money by nationwide taxation, to pay off those bonds. (Zinn 90)
Furthermore, the negative attitudes of the “founding fathers” towards democracy clearly show this case. In fact, they carry typical attitudes any capitalist would hold regarding democracy and can be best expressed by the founders themselves.
Elbridge Gerry thought:
“The evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy….” (Beard 197).
James Madison, in Federalist #10 stated:
[Democracies] have been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
Alexander Hamilton viewed the nature of the relationship between the governed and the governors as follows:
All communities divide themselves into the few and the many. The first are the rich and well born, the other the mass of the people. The voice of the people has been said to be the voice of God; and however generally this maxim has been quoted and believed, it is not true in fact. The people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right. Give therefore to the first class a distinct permanent share in the government (Beard 199)
Thomas Jefferson, at the time of Shays rebellion, said:
“I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing… It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government… The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” (Zinn 94)
The fathers were firm believers in the capitalist system – not in democracy. Democracy was of no use to them because they realized that it did not serve their interests. The foundations they laid were not democratic in nature. In fact, they are based on the ‘money is power’ principle.
James Madison acknowledges this point by stating that the basis for division – the reason behind the clash of interests – in society is economic:
“…the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold, and those who are without property, have ever formed distinct interests in society.” (Federalist #10)
Of course, this should come as no surprise, for Adam Smith – the ‘Father of Capitalism’, in his work, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, states:
Civil authority, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor or of those who have some property against those who have none at all. (311)
Wealth as a Source of Power
Every society has a specific set of ideas, beliefs, principles and objects which that society values. These ‘valuable entities’ extract their value from the ideology the society believes in and implements. A ‘valuable entity’ possesses the potential to fulfill some need or instinct in an individual. It provides the necessary ingredients for actions that result in acquiring the ‘valued entity’ which in turn satisfies the associated instinct and/or organic need. In Islam, for example, ideas such as the unity of the Ummah or the obligation to give wealth in the path of Allah are ‘valued entities’. Similarly, objects such as the Ka’bah’ are valuable to the Muslims and thus carry potential for the Ummah to act in order to protect them. Likewise, Islam assigns no value to the White House, and hence it would not produce the same reaction amongst the Muslims in a similar situation.
In Capitalist societies, objects considered valuable by the ideology – and thus to the people – have primarily financial value associated with them. In other words, entities such as capital, property and natural resources are considered valuable because they are forms of wealth, i.e., have financial worth. Thus, wealth is also considered a valuable object that is sought ruthlessly, protected fiercely and maintained carefully. A perpetual demand to acquire these valuables by individuals necessitates an associated attached cost in acquiring them. Thus, the acquisition of property or the sale of gold has an associated price attached. Those who possess the means of undertaking the cost to acquire the valuable object are the only ones who can actually acquire it. Thus, the wealthy have an advantage over the non-wealthy in their ability to acquire valued objects since only they can pay the associated cost.
This idea, when coupled with the idea of ‘unlimited needs and insufficient resources’ results in the satisfaction of most of the needs of the wealthy by the procurement of more of these insufficient resources. This naturally causes Capitalistic societies to have a highly stratified distribution of resources, i.e., the concentration of wealth in the hands of a very small sector in society.
As Grover Cleveland, a democrat running for President in 1884, remarked:
“No harm shall come to any business interest as the result of administrative policy so long as I am the President… a transfer of executive control from one party to another does not mean any serious disturbance of existing conditions.” (Zinn 252)
In 1893, Supreme Court Justice David J. Brewer, addressing the New York State Bar association said:
It is the unvarying law that the wealth of the community will be in the hands of the few… The great majority of men are unwilling to endure that long self-denial and saving which makes accumulation possible… and hence it has always been, and until human nature is remodeled always will be true, that the wealth of a nation is in the hands of a few… (Zinn 254)
As an example, Paul Krugman, in his article entitled The Right, the Rich, and the Facts shows that the top 1 percent of families in the US held 37% of the total net worth of the nation in 1992, a 6% increase from 1983 (American Prospect, Fall 1992, pp. 24-25). Figures from Michael Parenti’s Democracy for the Few indicate that 0.2% of the US population own approximately 60% of its corporate wealth; 1.6% own 80% of all stock, 100% of all state and municipal bonds and 88.5% of corporate bonds (8). The movement of wealth in society can be gauged from the US Congress’ figures which indicate that the top 1 percent of families captured 60% of the entire gain in national personal income in the 1980s (Congressional Budget Office, the Congress of the United States; 1992).
Further, the change in US average family incomes between 1979 and 1987 shows that the top fifth income recipients gained 18.7% in income whereas the bottom 5th recipients suffered a 9.2% income loss (Ways and Means Committee, US House of Reps.). This evidence points out the strikingly skewed and abnormal division of wealth within society, which is considered normal in Capitalism.
The ability to possess valued objects – necessary for the survival of human beings – by a small group of individuals results in the survival of the rest being dependent on the small group. The ownership of valued objects by the wealthy gives them an advantage over the remaining individuals since they control what satisfies the needs of the masses. The result of this inequality in wealth is an imbalance or unequal distribution of power. This is the dilemma facing democracy. On the one hand, it promises equal representation for all. On the other, it cannot divide power equally amongst the people – if at all this is possible. An unequal distribution of power naturally results in the more powerful having a louder voice and stronger leverage in determining the rules and systems that are applied in society. The rich have an upper hand over the rest because they have the means to deny the fulfillment of their needs for the rest. Democracy is but a mirage in such a situation since it is impossible to create a ‘balanced power base’ for all without an equal distribution of wealth in a Capitalist society.
Organized Interests
The protection of ‘valued entities’ in a society is ensured and enforced in the severest of ways by those individuals and groups who stand to gain or lose the most from these objects against any attempts to destroy, damage or dilute them. Some refer to this distinct group by the term establishment.
The term Establishment seems to have been invented in Britain to refer to an inner circle of important ministers, top civil servants, editors of quality newspapers, and a miscellany of academic and other public figures all capable of informal consultation with each other. (Macridis 56)
Capitalists consider the giving up of individual and ownership rights a major threat to their existence for it not only decreases their power and their competitive edge over others but also their ability to survive. In other words, it is against their interests. The powerful are subjected to lose a great amount in the event of unfavorable or critical circumstances. It is irrational to think that they would not want to fully protect their vast interests in such conditions. Surely they have the power and necessary drive needed for a fierce defense of their rights and valuables.
Consequently, in the event of a clash of interests between the wealthy and the rest, the former will have a better chance of securing their rights over the latter, either through the system or by force or if needed by negotiations. In such cases it becomes necessary to make sure that the largest number of interests are protected for the largest amount of time from the largest number of perceived threats. This is done in a number of ways, e.g., the creation of a certain public opinion through the media – discussed in a later section, or through interest groups. Of course, a stronger interest is one which has more leverage and can be voiced more forcefully. Once again, economic strength translates directly to power trampling the democratic concept of ‘equal opportunity’. Democracy, equal rights for the populace and equal access to the government turn out to be another hoax, whereas ‘differential access’ becomes a reality of the system. Interest groups and lobbies have become a permanent feature of the US political system. The best organized and most effective ones are those with the most financial resources. Corporations and other ‘moneyed-interests’ are overwhelmingly over-represented in the government. According to Greenberg and Page, in The Struggle for Democracy, Corporation related interest groups form about 46% of the representation in Congress (249). Elections cannot be won without large sums of money and support from influential lobbies and elite backed interest groups. Candidates usually are provided with the necessary finances by few very rich individuals or organizations (Democracy for the few p.209).
The Media and Public Opinion
An example of how economic power translates to the ability to control is the establishment owned mass-media. Public opinion is an extremely potent mobilizing force in any society. Any system that can control public opinion and channel it in a certain direction is able to exert substantial power over that society. The manufacture of public opinion is a method of mental control upon people which results in comprehensive control. A study of the American mass-media, reveals a corporation like setup of a few major media companies who monopolize the flow of information (Inventing Reality 27). The “power of information” has indeed been an effective tool for forming and channeling thoughts and concepts in society.
No people are willing to let their needs remain unsatisfied due to the control of a few. When such a condition is exposed and takes root in the people, the few will no longer remain in power for long. As mentioned before, the formulation of public opinion will mobilize the people to remove the oppressors. The U.S. elite realize this as a potential threat to their interests and thus understand that one of the ways to continue their control is to pacify the individuals in the society. The best means of pacification is the process of co-opting. The continued existence of the American ‘melting pot’ is due to this very concept. ‘Integration’ and ‘assimilation’ of all kinds of groups is an extremely soothing tactic that is used most effectively. ‘Mind-control’ by the media and the educational system is taken a step further by the establishment by containing and redirecting public opinion so that people remain aloof from the cause of their problems. Parenti, in Democracy for the Few, notes the relationship between politicians and public opinion and how ‘uninitiated’ public opinion is harnessed, steered and thus contained:
“When these [popular] sentiments are aroused to a certain intensity, leaders will respond, either by making minor concessions or by evoking images of change and democratic responsiveness that are lacking in substance. Leaders are always “responding” to the public, but so often it is with distracting irrelevancies, dilatory and discouraging tactics, facile reassurances, unfulfilled promises, outright lies or token programs that offer nothing more than a cosmetic application to a deep social problem.” (303).
This kind of behavior is expected from those who stand the most to lose from a drastic change. As James Madison stated:
“…the causes of faction cannot be removed; and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects.” (Federalist #10).
This idea of ‘containment’ is a reality even today. To fully comprehend whether the passage of a certain law or policy is a ‘democratic victory’ or a ‘containment measure’ requires an in depth study regarding it. Questions such as: what is the actual law? What are the consequences? Which group(s) benefits from it? In what ways? How does this policy affect the people? need to be answered. The comprehensive answer to all of these questions is beyond the scope of this article and can be examined at a later time. However, a brief example of containment of public resentment is the Civil Rights Movement where the untamed growing militant and separatist sentiments were channeled towards a much mellow and ‘pacifist’ approach by Martin Luther King, Jr.
Public opinion in a democratic society is not randomly formed by a ‘watchdog’ and ‘independent’ media – as is claimed by democracy. Public opinion is a very specific set of ideas carried by a considerable portion of society in such a manner that it can be considered the opinion of that society. It is impossible for such a uniform, well-defined and power-wielding set of ideas – the public opinion – to materialize by a random mixture of thoughts from various independent and unconnected sources. The ‘molding’ of public opinion requires massive public focus and mobilization by raising very specific issues. Consequently, this task can only be accomplished by an efficient and purposeful mechanism, i.e., the ‘media machinery’ which is owned and operated by the powerful. The freedom of expression supposedly granted to the people by democracy thus remains non-existent due to the control of the Capitalists. This is the case with the US media. As Parenti states:
Ten business and financial corporations control the three major television and radio networks (NBC, CBS, ABC), 34 subsidiary television stations, 201 cable TV systems, 62 radio stations, 20 record companies, 59 magazines including Times and Newsweek, 58 newspapers including the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the Los Angeles Times, 41 book publishers, and various motion picture companies like Columbia Pictures and Twentieth-Century Fox. Three-quarters of the major stockholders of ABC, CBS, and NBC are banks, such as Chase Manhattan, Morgan Guaranty Trust, Citibank, and The Bank of America (Inventing Reality p.27).
Corporations and Other Institutions
The media machine is not the only institution owned and operated by the wealthy elite. Their base of control has always been the multinational corporation. Almost one third of the top 500 US corporations are owned by one individual or family. In the relatively small span of 37 years between 1950 to 1986, “industrial assets” owned by the top 100 corporations grew from 39.8% to 61.1% (Thomas Dye p.20). As C. Wright Mills notes:
“The corporation is the source of, and the basis of, the continued power and privilege of wealth.” (116).
Therefore, it is not surprising to note that despite the Sherman Anti-trust Act of 1890 being enforced, the end of the 19th century found corporations merging at a tremendous pace. Approximately one-third of the US’ manufacturing assets were merged into 318 giant corporations between 1898 and 1904, producing a combined capitalization of $7.3 billion. (Robert Reich, The Work of Nations chap 3.)
It is very natural for corporations to be a source of power in a Capitalist society due to their being the driving force behind its economic well being. The interests of the society are determined by whether they agree with the interests of corporations and industrialists. Wars are fought for the objective of “protecting jobs” and concessions and exemptions are granted by the government to companies if some of its laws decrease or hinder their profits and interests. When the president of GM in the 1950s and then Secretary of State, Charles E. Wilson, was asked whether he had the ability to make a decision in the U.S.’ favor at the expense of GM, he replied that he could, however, he did not see such a problem happening:
“I cannot conceive of one because for years I thought what was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa. The difference did not exist. Our company is too big. It goes with the welfare of the country.” (Robert Reich, pp. 47-48)
Besides the media and the multinational-national corporations, the setup of other ‘non-profit’ ‘service’ institutions is also highly indicative of a “strong upper class accent.” Educational, medical, and cultural institutions like universities, hospitals etc. are controlled by a ‘board of trustees’ or a ‘board of directors’ who belong to the same richer upper echelons of society – specifically the industrialists. As in the case of corporations, members on these boards are the final and ultimate authority on policy implementation and have the last word in the hiring and firing process of employees and in effect have physical control over the institution.
Control in modern times requires more than force, more than law. It requires a population dangerously concentrated in cities and factories, whose lives are filled with cause for rebellion, be taught that all is right as it is. And so, the schools, the churches, the popular literature taught that to be rich was a sign of superiority, to be poor a sign of personal failure…
In those years after the Civil War, a man named Russell Conwell, a graduate of Yale Law School, a minister and author of best-selling books, gave the same lecture, “Acres of Diamonds,” more than five thousand times to audience across the country, reaching several million people in all. His message was that anyone could get rich if he tried hard enough, that everywhere if people looked closely enough, were ‘acres of diamonds.”
A sampling:
“The men who get rich may be the most honest men you find in the community… Let me say here clearly… ninety-eight out of one hundred of the rich men in America are honest. This is why they are rich. This is why they are trusted with money. This is why they carry on great enterprises and find plenty of people to work with them. It is because they are honest…”
Conwell was a founder of Temple University. Rockefeller was a donor to colleges all over the country and helped found the University of Chicago. Huntington, of the Central Pacific, gave money to two Negro colleges, Hampton Institute and Tuskegee Institute. Carnegie gave money to colleges and libraries. Johns Hopkins was founded by a millionaire merchant, and millionaire Cornelius Vanderbilt, Ezra Cornell, James Duke, and Leland Stanford created universities in their names.
The rich, giving part of their enormous earnings in this way, became known as philanthropists. These educational institutions did not encourage dissent; they trained the middlemen on the American system-the teachers, doctors, lawyers, administrators, engineers, technicians, politicians-those who would be paid to keep the system going, to be loyal buffers against trouble. (Zinn 256)
Conclusion
The system of democracy has never been able to grant sovereignty to all people. It has failed miserably time and time again in protecting the ‘freedoms’ it promises them. Throughout its history it has been used as a tool by Capitalism to protect the interests of the capitalists. Democracy as an idea is a dysfunctional one and unable to ensure even its own existence and dominance, let alone be able to address the problems of mankind. The reasons behind the failure of democracy are the unrealistic and inhuman objectives it seeks and the imaginary and hypothetical picture it paints of the equality of human beings. Democracy is unable to solve the many problems faced by human beings due to its human origins, i.e., it is a man-made system which destines it to failure from the onset.
The history of Capitalism is witness to the infinite injustices and oppression caused to humanity. It is an exploitative system which produces and intensifies problems instead of providing solutions. It ensures the dominance and power of a handful of individuals over the entire society. It is another glaring proof of the fact that human beings are incapable of producing a system which brings justice to all mankind and not to small cliques in society.
The United States has always been a Capitalist society even though it promotes the dual sided images of democracy and freedom. The continued application of Capitalism under the guise of democracy is easily apparent to anyone who carefully analyzes the setup of society. Power to influence and implement decisions lies exclusively in an infinitesimally small group of individuals and families, who not only control most of the country’s resources, wealth and industry but use them for their benefit and interest regardless of the consequences to the rest of the world. The dominance of Capitalist states like the U.S. over the rest of the world has resulted in untold miseries and ever increasing problems facing mankind today. The solution for the problems of humanity is not possible without the realization of two very important yet rarely understood ideas: all manmade systems are bound to fail due to the human being’s inherent biases and limitations in terms of his nature, knowledge and ability to legislate. Not comprehending this fact will lead mankind in yet another vicious circle, ending with the same oppression, corruption and chaos that has flowed from Democracy and Capitalism. Consequently, a system capable of issuing correct solutions, ensuring justice for all and eliminating all corrupt practices can only be produced by an unbiased and unlimited source of knowledge: the Creator, Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta’ala). l
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1. Beard, Charles Austin, An economic interpretation of the constitution of the United States. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1913.
2. Chomsky, Noam, Deterring Democracy. New York: Hill and Wang, 1992.
3. Edward S. Herman, Manufacturing consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York: Pantheon Books, 1988.
4. Chomsky, Noam, Necessary Illusions: Thought control in democratic societies. Montreal: CBC Enterprises, 1989.
5. Chomsky, Noam, The Prosperous Few and the Restless Many. Berkeley: Odonian Press, 1993.
6. Dye, Thomas, Who’s running America. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1990.
7. Greenberg, Edward S., Serving the few: Corporate Capitalism and the bias of Government policy. New York: Wiley, 1974.
8. Greenberg and Page, The Struggle for Democracy. New York: Harper Collins College Publishers, 1995.
9. Krugman, Paul R., The Right, the Rich, and the Facts. American Prospect; Fall 1992.
10. Macridis, Roy C., Foreign Policy in World Politics. Prentice-Hall, 1972
11. Parenti, Michael, Democracy for the few. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980.
12. Parenti, Michael, Inventing Reality: The Politics Of Mass Media. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1986.
13. Parenti Michael, Power and the Powerless. New York:St. Martin’s Press, 1978.
14. Prewitt and Stone, The Ruling Elites. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.
15. Shwartz, Michael (ed.), The Structure of Power in America:
The corporate Elite as a ruling class. New York: Holmes & Meier, 1988.
16. Schattschneider. E., The Semi-sovereign People. Hinsdale: Dryden Press, 1975.
17. Smith, Adam, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1952.
18. Wright Mills, The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press, 1956.
19. Zinn, Howard, A People’s History of the United States. Harper Perennial, 1995
Khalifornia Journal v2 No.3, July-September 1997
