Archive for February, 2011

The Letter of Hizb ut tahrir to the Anti-Hadeeth Peoples

February 21, 2011

First: The position of the Sunnah with regards to the Qur’an It is well known that the Messenger (saw) was asked about many issues and he used to refrain from answering, whilst he waited for divine revelation. When the divine revelation came down he conveyed what had been revealed. The relation of the Sunnah to the Qur’an is that it explains it. It elaborates the ambivalent text (Mujmal), specifies the generality of it (‘Umoom), restricts its absolute text (Mutlaq), adds a branch to an origin, or brings legislation that the Qur’an has not stated. This is manifested as follows.

a) Elaboration of the ambivalent text of the Qur’an The ambivalent text (Mujmal) denotes a word or text whose meaning (Dalaalah) is unclear, i.e. its intended meaning is ambivalent. For example, the obligation of Salah, Zakaah and Hajj has been mentioned in the Qur’an in an ambivalent (Mujmal) form, as the manner of performing the Salah and the Hajj is absent. Also absent is an elaboration on what things Zakaah is obliged upon and how much the obligatory Zakaah is. Thus, the Sunnah has clarified how Salah is to be performed; the number of rak’aat, its timings etc. The Sunnah has also clarified the rites of Hajj; it has also clarified the things on which Zakaah is obligatory and the nisaab (minimum amount) at which its payment becomes obligatory. It has been reported that the Messenger (saw) did not impose the Sadaqah (Zakaah) except in six things; wheat, barley, dates, raisins, maize, camels, cows, sheep, gold and silver. Jihad has also been mentioned in the Qur’an in an ambivalent manner (Mujmal). Then the Sunnah clarified how it should be executed. It clarified what comes before, after and whatever is related to it, in terms of relations (with other states).

b) Specifying the general text (‘Aamm) of the Qur’an The general text (‘Aamm) is the expression that includes everything to which it is applicable, such as ‘Muslim’, ‘your children’, and ‘men’. The Qur’an contains such general texts; and the Sunnah specified these general texts. For example; “Allah commands you as regards your children’s (inheritance); to the male, a portion equal to that of two females.” [TMQ An-Nisaa: 11] This ayah is general in letting sons inherit from fathers i.e. allowing every son inherit from his father. So the Sunnah specified this general text and excluded the Prophets from this rule. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said; “We, the Prophets, do not leave in inheritance, what we leave is Sadaqah.” Therefore, children of the Prophet do not inherit from him. The Sunnah has specified the inheriting person as other than those who murder their inheritors (fathers). The Messenger (saw) said; “The murderer does not inherit.” Thus, the Messenger (saw) prevented the son who killed his father from inheriting from him. The Qur’an mentioned the following; “The woman and the man guilty of illegal sexual intercourse, flog each of them with a hundred stripes.” [TMQ An-Nur: 2] This is general and inclusive of anyone who commits Zina, whether married or not. Then the Sunnah came and specified this rule to the unmarried people, and obliged that the married people (who commit Zina) be stoned. “Maa’iz committed Zina so he was stoned.” In the Qur’an, the following was mentioned; “Then kill the Mushrikûn [Polytheists].” [TMQ At-Tawbah: 5] This is a general text regarding every Mushrik, whether from the people of the book or from the Mushrik Arabs or others. Then the Sunnah came and specified this by the saying of the Messenger (saw) regarding the Majoos of Hajar; “Treat them like the people of the book, but don’t eat their slaughtered meat and do not marry their women.”

c) Restricting the absolute text (Mutlaq) of the Kitab The Mutlaq is the term that is unlimited in its application. The word ‘Raqabah’ (meaning ‘slave’, but literally denoting ‘neck’) applies to all slaves whether they are believers or kuffar, and the word ‘Dinaar’ applies to the Iraqi, Libyan or Kuwaiti one. In the Qur’an we find Ayaat that are Mutlaq and the Sunnah came and restricted these with a specific restriction. For example, He (swt) said; “Cut off (from the wrist joint) the (right) hand of the thief, male or female.” [TMQ Al-Maa`idah: 38] This is Mutlaq in regards to all types of theft. Then the Sunnah came and restricted the quantity at which something is considered a theft to be a quarter of a gold Dinaar and more. He (saw) said; “Cutting is (obliged) in a quarter of a Dinaar or more.” Also it restricted the cutting of the hand from the wrist and not from any other place.

d) Adding a peripheral rule mentioned in the Sunnah with an original rule present in the Qur’an In the Qur’an, the prohibition of marrying two sisters at the same time is mentioned. He (swt) said; “And two sisters in wedlock at the same time, except for what has already passed.” [TMQ An-Nisaa: 23] However, the Qur’an did not mention the prohibition of marrying a woman and her paternal or maternal aunt at the same time, or marrying at the same time the daughter of her brother or her sister. So the Sunnah came and clarified this. He (saw) said; “A woman and her paternal or maternal aunt cannot be married at the same time; nor can a woman and her brother’s or sister’s daughter be married at the same time. If you did this, then you have cut the links of your womb.” So he added all of this to the original rule of not allowing the marriage of two sisters to the same man at the same time. The Qur’an also mentions the prohibition of marrying mothers and sisters through suckling (Radaa’ah). He (swt) said; “Your foster mother who gave you suck, and your foster milk suckling sisters.” [TMQ An-Nisaa: 23] So the Sunnah has come and added this to the original rule and the rest of the relatives through suckling which are forbidden to marry due to lineage, such as the paternal and maternal aunt, daughter of the brother, daughter of the sister etc. He (saw) said; “Suckling makes women unlawful (for marriage) the same as birth makes (them) unlawful.”

e) The Sunnah has also added new legislation that finds no origin in the Qur’an This is like the public amenities, oil and mines for gold, iron, silver, copper etc. Similar to that are the rivers, seas, green pastures and forests, as part of the public property. He (saw) said; “The people are partners in three: water, green pastures and fire.” He (saw) said; “Mina is the camping place for he who reached (there) first”, and he (saw) returned the land that had been given out to Abyad b. Hammal after he learnt that it contained minerals of unknown quantity. Another example is the prohibition of customs. He (saw) said; “He who imposes Maks (custom duty) would not enter paradise.” Also included in this is the confiscation of land from the one who neglects it for three consecutive years due to the saying of the Messenger (saw); “Anyone who fences a land (Muhtajir) has no right to it after three years.”

Second: Citing Sunnah as a proof It is valid to use the authentic Sunnah as proof for ‘Aqaa’id (belief) and Shar’ee rules (Ahkaam). The difference between belief and Ahkaam is that belief demands Imaan and Ahkaam demand work and application. Since the ‘Aqeedah is the decisive belief that agrees with reality based on evidence’ then its evidence must lead to decisive belief (tasdeeq jaazim). This will not be possible unless the daleel (evidence) itself is decisive, so as to be an evidence for certainty. This is because the speculative evidence (daleel zanni) cannot establish decisiveness and hence cannot be a daleel for the ‘Aqeedah. Therefore, the extraction of evidence for the ‘Aqeedah from the Sunnah must be via the qat’i (definite) Ahadeeth, which are the Mutawatir Ahadeeth narrated by a daabit (retentive) group of tabi’ee tabi’een from a daabit group of tabe’een from a daabit group of Sahabah from the Prophet (saw), such that each group constitutes a sufficient number of people that precludes the possibility of their agreement on a lie. As for the Shar’ee rules, it is allowed to extract them, from both definite (qat’i) and speculative (zanni) evidences i.e. by Mutawaatir and Ahaad Ahadeeth. Despite the fact that the Ahaad Ahadeeth, convey least amount of doubt, they are not definite. It is allowed to use them as evidence for all Shar’ee rules in ‘Ibadaat (worship), Mu’amalaat (transactions), ‘Uqubaat (penal codes). This is because it has been proven that one can use them as proof due to the Ijmaa’ (consensus) of the Sahabah and The Noble Qur’an. He (swt) said; “And get two witnesses out of your own men.” [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 282] And He (swt) said; “And take for witness two just persons from among you (Muslims).” [TMQ At-Talaaq: 2] And He (swt) said; “Take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you against the.” [TMQ An-Nisaa:15] These Ayaat have established that the Nisaab of testimony is two or four men (depending upon the subject matter for testimony). Testimony (Shahaadah) is considered as transmission (naql). Two or four witnesses do not indicate decisiveness; rather they indicate Zann (uncertainty). This is because they are not a large enough group from which the possibility of an agreement on a lie can be precluded, though their testimony indicates least amount of doubt. The Sharee’ah has accepted this; and therefore the Ahaad reports that convey least amount of doubt are accepted in analogy with the acceptance of two or four witnesses. This is because the truth is assumed over the lie as long as the transmitter of the Hadith is just (‘adl), trustworthy (thiqah) and retentive (daabit) and he has met the one he is narrating from. Thus, the lie is precluded and the truthfulness is made weightier. It has also been established, by definite evidence, that the Messenger (saw) sent messengers to kings to invite them to Islam; and to each king he sent one messenger. If it were not allowed to execute the conveyance of the Da’wah by a single person, then the Messenger (saw) would not have accepted to send a single messenger to convey the Da’wah. So this is explicit evidence from the actions of the Messenger (saw) that the single report is a proof in conveyance. The Messenger (saw) used also to send a single person to convey the Ahkaam. We can see this when the Qiblah changed from Bayt ul-Maqdis to the Ka’bah. So he sent a single person to convey this hukm. Those who heard this message changed their direction of the Salah from Bayt ul-Maqdis to the Ka’bah whilst engaged in performing their Salah, which they didn’t break. That is why their masjid is called Masjid ul-Qiblatayn (The Mosque of the two prayer directions). Similarly, when alcohol was forbidden, he (saw) sent one person to inform the Muslims of its prohibition and ordered them to pour out what they had remaining, hence the Sahabah broke their wine jugs. These and other such examples of the actions of the Messenger (saw) are a proof that obliges one to act upon the Khabar Ahaad (solitary narrations) in the matters of Shar’ee rules.

Third: The issue of the compilation of the Sunnah The noble Sahabah, were in a position of being constantly around the Messenger (saw), hearing his sayings, witnessing his actions and registering his consent about their actions. When they had difficulty in understanding an ayah or if they differed over its Tafseer (explanation) or in understanding a Hukm, they referred to the Ahadeeth to clarify the matter. Initially the Muslims relied upon memory and their retentive abilities. However, when Islam spread and the cities were distant and the Sahabah were scattered throughout the regions and many had died, a need was felt to compile the Hadith. The compilation of the Ahadeeth began at the time of the Sahabah. It has been narrated that Abu Hurayrah said; “From the companions of the Prophet (saw), no one narrated more Ahadeeth than me except Abd Allah b. Umar. He used to write them down, but I did not.” However, those Sahabah who wrote down the Ahadeeth were a few in number. The Sahabah used to place a lot of attention on the knowledge of Ahadeeth. They did not take a Hadith except after they proved that it had come from the Messenger (saw); and in this regard they used to be very careful. After the murder of ‘Uthman and the emergence of political factions, Ahadeeth were concocted to support the claims of each faction due to their inability to find (genuine) Ahadeeth from the Messenger (saw). After the fitnah (civil war) had abated the Muslims embarked upon checking the Ahadeeth to separate the authentic (Sahih) from the spurious and fabricated (Maw’du). They spent a lot of effort in investigating this by studying the narrators and their lives—to the extent that there is no other science like the science of Ahadeeth in its degree of study, research and investigation—until they had sifted the Ahadeeth and distinguished the authentic ones from the false ones. They began to study the status of the narrators one after another until the turn of the century, in the time of ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-Azeez who ordered that the Hadith be written down. The first one to write down the Hadith upon the order of ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-Azeez was Muhammad b. Muslim az-Zuhri. Then the writing of Ahadeeth began to spread. Some of those who compiled the Ahadeeth are the following: ‘Ibn Jurayj in Makkah, Malik in Madinah, Hammad in Basrah, ath-Thawri in Kufa, al-Awza’i in Ash-Shaam, until the advent of Imam Bukhari. He was distinguished in the science of Ahadeeth and wrote his renowned book, Saheeh al-Bukhari, in which he quoted the Ahadeeth that he perceived to be authentic. He was followed in his way by Muslim b. al-Hajjaj who was his student. He wrote his famous book, Saheeh Muslim.

Fourth: Apparent Conflict between the Ahadeeth This matter has been resolved by the ‘Ulama of the Muslims. This is because if a conflict occurs between the qat’i (definite) and zanni (speculative), then the Qat’i is taken and the zanni is discarded. An example of this is what has been narrated from Fatimah b. Qays that she said; “My husband divorced me three times at the time of the Messenger of Allah (saw). I went to the Prophet (saw) but he did not assign to me a lodging (sukna) and nor maintenance (nafaqah).” This Hadith is rejected because it contradicts the Qur’an. He (swt) said; “Lodge them (the divorced women) where you dwell, according to your means.” [TMQ At-Talaq: 6] So this Hadith is rejected because it contradicts the qat’i meaning of the Qur’an. When a conflict occurs between the ‘Aamm (general) and the Khaas (specific), between the Mujmal (ambivalent) and the Mubayyan (elaborated) and between the Mutlaq (unrestricted) and the Muqayyad (restricted), then the ‘Aamm is elaborated by the Khaas, the Mujmal by the Mubayyan and the Mutlaq by the Muqayyad, and thus both evidences are used. If both evidences are not of these types and they are in conflict, then we should determine which one came first chronologically; thus the latter would abrogate the former. Let us turn, to the two examples, to clarify the mistaken view and show how there is no contradiction between these Ahadeeth, because it is possible to reconcile them. So the Hadith; “When two Muslims clash with their swords, then the killer and the killed both go to the Fire.” This Hadith is Saheeh, but the wording ‘two Muslims’, ‘killer’ and ‘killed’ are general terms; there are Ayaat and Ahadeeth that specify them. Thus, Allah (swt) said; “If two parties among the believers fall into a fight, make peace between them. But if one of them transgresses beyond bounds against the other, then fight (all) against the one that transgresses until they comply with the command of Allah.” Here Allah (swt) ordered the fighting of the rebellious group, despite the fact that they are from the believers as stated in the ayah. He (swt) ordered the believers to fight them until they return to the order of Allah. Here two Muslims meet with their swords by an order from Allah. So this ayah specifies the word ‘killer’ and ‘killed’ mentioned in the Hadith (i.e. the ayah excludes these fighting believers from the above mentioned Hadith). It was also narrated in the Hadith from the Messenger (saw), he said; “The one who is killed for his blood he is a Shaheed, and the one who is killed for his property he is a Shaheed and whoever is killed for his honour he is a Shaheed.” This Hadith also specifies the Hadith under discussion. This is the case when a Muslim fights a Muslim in defence of his life, property and honour, so he will not be in the Fire, whether he was a killer or the one killed. The Messenger (Saw) also said; “Whosoever comes to you while your affairs are united under one man, wishing to divide your unity, then strike his neck with the sword (kill him), whoever he is.” He (saw) also said; “When the Bay’ah is given to two khulafaa’ kill the latter of them.” Both of these Ahadeeth specify the Hadith regarding the meeting of two Muslims with their swords. The Muslim who fights the rebels against the state will not enter the Fire, whether he was the killer or killed. Therefore, this Hadith does not apply to Ali b. Abi Taalib, so Ali will be one of those promised Jannah. Thus, there is no contradiction. As for the Hadith of ‘Aisha that; “Aisha is deficient in mind and Deen.” This is not a Hadith. As for the Hadith; “Take half your Deen from the mouth of ‘Aisha”, this also, with such a wording, is not a Hadith. What has been reported is; “Take half your Deen from this Humayraa.” So taking half the Deen does not contradict with women being deficient in mind and Deen. This is because deficiency in the Deen refers to the fact that she does not pray or fast during her period of menstruation and childbirth (post natal bleeding) as the Messenger (saw) has informed us. As for the deficiency in the mind, it is from the angle that Allah (swt) has made the testimony of a woman half the testimony of a man. However, this does not prevent a woman from being a scholar; therefore, there is no contradiction.

Fifth: The importance of Sunnah One understands from what has been mentioned previously that the sayings and actions of the Messenger (saw) are one of the foundations of Islam. It is a Shar’ee daleel, from which the beliefs and Ahkaam are taken just as they are taken from the Qur’an. The Sunnah also clarifies, elucidates, interprets and explains the Qur’an. This is by clarifying its Mujmal (ambivalent) text, specifying the general (‘Aamm), restricting the absolute (Mutlaq) text and adding the peripheral rules to the original rules mentioned in the Qur’an. It also brings new legislation that does not have an origin in the Qur’an. One has to depend on the Sunnah to understand the Qur’an and understand the beliefs and Shar’ee rules whether they are form the ‘Ibdaaat (worships), individual behaviour such as morals (Akhlaaq), punishments (‘Uqubaat) or transactions (Mu’amalaat). From the Prophetic Sunnah we have understood the reality of the ruling system in Islam. We have also understood that the ruling system is the system of the Khilafah and that the Khaleefah is appointed via the Bay’ah. From the Sunnah we have also understood the structure of the ruling system, just as we have understood from the Sunnah that the relationship of the Islamic state with other states is conducted on the basis of Jihad. We know how this relationship will be in time of war and peace and what kind of dealings we will have with other states. What are the agreements, treaties, and truces that are allowed to be held and those that are forbidden. We also know when the emergency treaties are allowed and when they are forbidden. From the Sunnah we have understood how the Khaleefah will implement the system of Islam on the citizens, whether Muslims, Zimmis, or those with whom we have a treaty (Mu’aahideen). From the Prophetic Sunnah we have understood the reality of the economic system in Islam, ownership and its three types, private property, public property, and state property; and we have understood the state’s wealth sources or revenues and expenditure, and also that its currency must be gold or silver, together with the manner of its exchange. From this also we have learnt that the economic problem is the satisfaction of basic needs in terms of food, clothing and shelter; and that the state is required to provide these basic needs in case the individual is unable to do so himself or the one on whom the nafaqah (financial maintenance) is an obligation is unable to provide it. From the Sunnah we have understood as well the details of the social system, which is the relationship between men and women. From the Sunnah we have learnt the education policy. In short, all the Ahkaam that treat all the problems of life from all angles, the way we have adopted them is through the Sunnah, i.e. the sayings, actions and consent of the Messenger (saw). From this one can understand the level of the importance of the Sunnah and the value of the obligation of adhering to it in it capacity as a part of the foundation of Islam, just like the Qur’an. It is also understood that it is not allowed to abandon it, whatever the situation; one must give attention to it exactly as one gives attention to the Qur’an. As for what anti-hadeeth people said, that they wish to abandon the Sunnah and confine theirselves to the Qur’an, because their fear that the Qur’an will be lost, fabricated or changed, as happened with the other (revealed) Books. We say to you the following.

Firstly, Allah (swt) has promised that He will protect The Noble Qur’an until the end of time when He (swt) said; “Verily We, It is We, Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur’an) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption).” [TMQ Al-Hijr: 9] Had Allah (swt) not promised to protect the Qur’an, then it would not have remained as it is to this day, after all the forces of kufr and shirk have come together to destroy Islam and the Muslims. What has kept the Qur’an safe from change and fabrication is nothing but the definite promise of Allah (swt) that He will protect it. Secondly we also say to you that abandoning the Sunnah does not lead to protection of the Qur’an; it will rather lead to the loss of Qur’an and the loss of Islam. This is because abandoning the Sunnah is a rejection of the definite Ayaat mentioned in the Qur’an, which have ordered that we take the Prophetic Sunnah, whether these are its sayings or actions.

Sixth: The Consequences of abandoning the Sunnah The extent of the danger that confining oneself to the Qur’an and abandoning the Sunnah can lead to has become very clear from what has been mentioned above. This is because it implies that there is doubt in the noble Sahabah from whom we have taken our Deen. Doubt in them will ultimately lead to doubt in everything they have transmitted to us from the Messenger (saw); it will not only lead to doubt in the Sunnah, but also doubt in The Noble Qur’an. This is because they are the ones who transmitted the Qur’an to us; therefore, it will lead to doubt in the whole of Islam. Doubt in Islam will definitely lead to its abandonment and destruction. At best, the abandoning the Sunnah will lead to abandoning most of the rules of Islam. This is because most of the rules of Islam are taken from the Sunnah, since the Sunnah clarifies, elucidates and interprets the Qur’an and adds detailed explanation to its original rules. It also brings new Ahkaam that do not have an origin in the Qur’an. This means leaving Islam and abandoning it. From this one realises the extent of the danger of the call to abandon the Sunnah and to confine oneself to the Qur’an, and exposes the truth of this call as explicit kufr. Such a call does not come from anyone except those who are outside the fold of Islam, and from the enemies of Islam, who are working to destroy it using various means. From this we realise the evil and danger of the enemies of Islam from the kaafir states who have resorted to plotting against Islam using various means throughout the ages. We can also understand what Britain and the western states had undertaken prior to World War I, where they created doubt and used agents disguised as Muslims as a tool to destroy Islam. This is what they did with Mustafah Kamal Ataturk. Britain groomed him knowing fully well that he was from the Jews of Dunma in Salonika. They are a group of Jews who pretended to have embraced Islam towards the latter period of the Uthmani state in order to work to destroy the Khilafah. This is exactly what happened. Bringing him to power was the price the English preferred to pay; in return they secured the destruction of the Khilafah state and the abolition of the rules of Islam in Turkey. In its place they enacted western systems and rules, and replaced the Arabic letters with the Latin alphabet to distance the Turks from any linkage to the vitality of the Arabic language and their connection to their brothers the Arabs. Therefore, it is very clear that the western states are the most evil enemies of Islam. They are the ones who are drawing up roles for those agents they are grooming from the sons of the Muslims in order to use them as tools to attack Islam. Today, after the Muslims have begun to be conscious of Islam after they withdrew their trust in all the ideas presented to them by the Kaafir West, concepts such as nationalism, patriotism, capitalism, socialism and communism. They have lost all confidence in political parties and blocks presented to them whether Ba’athist, Arab nationalist, Communist, socialist or Nasserite. As a result of this feeling the people have for Islam, the western states began to use different styles to give vent to this emotion fearing that this might lead to the return of the Khilafah and the return of Islam to life’s reality. This is because when the Khilafah comes back to existence and Islam comes back to the reality of life, this will pose a danger to the thoughts, interests and even existence of The West. They remember how the Muslims embedded firmly the banner of Laa ilaaha illallaah, Muhammadur rasoolullaah in al-Andalus for 800 years and in eastern Europe for about 400 years. They also realise that the return of the Khilafah and the return of Islam to life’s affairs will be followed up by the Khilafah state’s work to seize the initiative from America, Russia and the western states. Thus the Khilafah will return as the number one state in the world as was the case in the past, ever since it defeated the Roman and Persian states until the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th century CE, except for short periods during the Tatar attack and The Crusades.

Seventh: Islam and politics These anti-hadeeth people said, in the discussion that the Deen is different to politics because politics consists of lies, deception, hypocrisy, trickery, treachery and Machiavellian tactics, as if they want to say; what has Islam to do with political work? We wish to say to you that politics is looking after the affairs internally by implementing on the citizens the system adopted by the state, and externally in accordance with the Idea embraced by the nation or embraced by the people in power. Lying, deceit and deception is not politics; politics is rather to look after the affairs of the people with the thoughts you carry and the systems that you adopt. Lies, deception, hypocrisy, trickery, treachery and Machiavellian tactics are the work of politicians who adopt the western civilisation or the viewpoint of the socialists, including the communists, as a style to execute their policies, i.e. to look after the affairs according to the viewpoint they have adopted and established over it. What they do is not considered looking after the affairs of people. The western civilisation and socialists, including the communists, have no problem in pursuing such styles because they consider them indispensable for them in looking after the affairs. Islam, is different to this. It is a comprehensive system for all life’s affairs. It is established upon a political ‘Aqeedah, which is an intellectual leadership and an intellectual basis upon which thoughts are built. Systems and Ahkaam, which are implemented to look after the affairs, emanate from this ‘Aqeedah. Islam obliges that its method (tareeqah) be of the same kind as its idea (fikrah). So the method of Islam is the Ahkam Sharee’ah derived from the Kitab of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw). Therefore, politics in Islam, which is the management of the affairs exists by the full implementation of the system of Islam upon all the citizens internally, and carrying Islam externally to the world by way of Jihad. The external relations of the State in Islam are built upon the framework of Jihad and upon what it requires. Therefore, all relations, pacts, cease-fires and treaties are conducted only according to the need of Jihad and in compliance with the Ahkam of Islam derived from the Kitab and Sunnah. Thus all the internal and external actions are in accordance with the Hukm Shar’ee derived from the Kitab and Sunnah. Furthermore, Islamic civilization forbids the use of lies, deception, treachery and Machiavellian styles. This is because these styles contradict with Islam. However, this does not prevent the use of shrewdness; so revealing the styles while hiding the aims and objectives is allowed. It should not occur to someone’s mind that it is not possible to implement Islam in the contemporary world, as long as one adheres to the Ahkaam derived from the Kitab and Sunnah, in every matter of politics—meaning in looking after the affairs, internally and externally—whether big or small. Such talk is nonsense and does not reflect the reality. Thus, we find ‘Umar b. al-Khattab, who was not a chief of a tribe, a village chief, the ruler of a city, or a monk in a monastery shut off from the world; rather he was the Khaleefah, ruler of the biggest state present in the world after the demolition of the two great powers; The Persians and The Romans. He wrested the initiative from both of them until the Islamic state, in his time, became the number one state in the world. Did he rule this great state without a system or did he rule according to Roman or Persian law? No one claimed this, whether he was an enemy or a friend, Kaafir or Muslim. Everyone agreed that the Ameer al-Mu`mineen used to rule this vast state—where the only way of travelling its distance was either by foot or on camel—with Islam and Islam only, in its generalities and details, in every matter big or small, to the extent that he felt the weight of responsibility so much that he used to fear Allah ‘Azza wa Jall constantly until he would say; “By Allah, if a sheep tripped on the banks of the Euphrates then I fear that Allah (swt) would ask me about it.” Did ‘Umar use lies, deceit, deception, treachery and Machiavellianism as a means to implement his policy, i.e. to look after the affairs of the people, internally and externally? Allah forbid! No and a thousand times no! Everyone agrees that ‘Umar, in public and in secret, feared Allah and strictly adhered to His orders and prohibitions. Do you think his attachment to the application of Ahkam of Islam and his restriction and devotion to them precluded him from running the affairs of ruling, looking after the interests of the people and carrying Islam via Jihad, as a Message to the whole Dunya? The fact that he seized the reigns of power from the Persians and the Romans, and he made the Islamic state the number one state in the world is enough to discount this false claim. It is enough to shatter such a theory by the reaction of the messenger of Kisra, who was amazed when he came to Madinah and saw ‘Umar sleeping under the shade of a tree without a soldier or a guard, in response to a sight he was unaccustomed to seeing, he proclaimed his famous words; “You governed and were just, so you felt safe and slept, O ‘Umar.” This is the state we want and this is the Khilafah we want to establish. This is the policy we want to follow and these are the systems we want to apply. Finally, from all of this, you can see that Islam is the primary vital issue of the Muslims. It is a fundamental issue for them. The demolition of these feeble states cannot be achieved without the return of the Khilafah and the return of Islam to life’s reality. … Therefore, our work to bring back Islam into the reality of life and to carry it as a message to the world via the establishment of the Khilafah state is fundamental; it is the primary issue of the Muslims. Before we finish our letter, we wish to say to you, that, even though your role has been defined and drawn out for you, we know that every human being has the capacity—when his mistake becomes apparent to him and the issue becomes clear before him—to rectify himself. So do not let your false sense of honour overtake you. You should rather restore your sincerity and abandon the role that has been drawn out for you to follow, due to its seriousness and danger.

Therefore, we call you to discard your call, leave the plan that has been drawn out for you and abandon your ‘old faith’. We also call on you to hand over your allegiance to the Qur’an and As-Sunnah so as to declare the support of the Khilafah and together with us to re-establish the Khilafah ‘ala minhaj an-nubuwwah, on the Kitab of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw). He (swt) said; “O you who believe! Answer Allâh (by obeying Him) and (His) Messenger when he (saw) calls you to that which will give you life.” [TMQ Al-Anfaal: 14]

Hizb ut-Tahrir