The Obligation of Khilafah

Though the evidences for Khilafah are many, we start with a daleel that perhaps better than any other describes our reality today, a time when no Khaleefah exists. The hadith was reported by Imam Muslim on the authority of Nafi' that the Messenger (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

''The one who removes his hand from obedience he will meet Allah without a proof for himself' and Whosoever dies without a bay'ah on his neck dies the death of Jahiliyyah.''

From this hadith can be deduced the Hukm Shar'i for a situation when Muslims die without the presence of a Khaleefah to rule over them. Perhaps it is the unusual nature of such a situation that explains why so few Fuqahaa (jurists) addressed this hadith while the numerous other evidences which establish the obligation of Khilafah have received greater attention and scrutiny. They could not have imagined a situation when a Muslim would die without the presence of a Khaleefah. Hence most of their discussions tended to centre on the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah after the death of the previous Khaleefah; or that it was obligatory to obey the existing Khaleefah and so having a Khaleefah must be obligatory. Yet, the unthinkable happened, the Khilafah was destroyed, and consequently generations of Muslims have died while having no Khaleefah over them. This noble hadith of the Prophet SAW assumes a relevance that those scholars did not envisage. 

The process of extraction

What is the Manaat (reality) of the text?

The hadith is describing not one but two types of people since it came in two parts as indicated by the waw al-isti`naaf or ibtidaa` (in English the word 'and' is used) (i.e. the disjunctive syntax where the waw begins a new sentence). 

In the first part it says: 'The one who removes his hand from obedience he will meet Allah without a proof for himself' This is when the Khaleefah exists and someone withholds his obedience to the Khaleefah. 

In the second part it is not describing the same person since the waw al- isti`naaf indicates it is beginning a new sentence to make a different point. This time he (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) says: And (waw al- isti`naaf) the one who dies without a bay'ah on his neck he dies the death of jahiliyyah' This is further confirmed by the fact that he repeats the personal pronoun 'man' (the one who or whosoever). This also indicates the hadith discusses two types of people in two different situations. 

To appreciate this point better it helps to look at another hadith where exactly the same thing happens. He (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: man maata fee sabeelillah fahuwa shaheed wa man maata bit-taa'oon fahuwa shaheed [Sahih Muslim]. Meaning: ''The one who dies in the Path of Allah he is shaeed and (waw al- isti`naaf) the one who dies in a plague he is a shaeed''

The death here occurs in two states separated by the waw al- isti`naaf. So the first death is in the Path of Allah whilst the second death occurs in a plague. It would be absurd if someone claimed here that the hadith is talking about the same situation.

Thus the hadith in question is talking about two different situations. The first situation as we said is when someone withholds his obedience to the existing Khaleefah. The second part is about 'the one who dies without a bay'ah on his neck.' The waw al-Haal (waw of condition) in wa laysa fi 'unuqihi bay'ah clarifies the state in which the person dies, and in this case it is when he dies 'without a bay'ah on his neck'.

So what is that state when someone dies without a bay'ah on his neck? It cannot mean giving the bay'ah because the hadith did not say 'wa lam yu'til bay'ah' (and he did not give the bay'ah). Giving the bay'ah (pledge) is a kifayah duty (sufficiency) and not an individual obligation as indicated by the Ijma' as-sahabah (consensus of the Sahabah). The contractual bay'ah does not require every single person to physically give it, rather it is enough for the Ahlul Halli wal 'Aqd (those who represent the Muslims) to give the bay'ah on behalf of the people. The result of this contracting by the representatives of the Muslims ‘Aqd is that every Muslim, even those living outside the Islamic authority, would have a bay'ah on his neck.  

Thus, the hadith is very precise in its description. It is not talking about giving bay'ah to a Khaleefah but rather having a 'Bay'ah on the neck for a Khaleefah' which describes a situation when someone dies without the presence of a Khaleefah having been contracted. Also there is nothing in this hadith that specifies this situation to a selected few so it cannot be said that the hadith is addressing the only representatives of Muslims e.g. Scholars or others in positions of authority. Rather it addresses all Muslims. 

Finally, the use of the expression 'man maata' deserves a further comment. The reference to the point of death indicates that the hukm (rule) must exist throughout his life. There cannot be a point in his life when he is in a state without a bay'ah on his neck i.e. without the presence of a Khaleefah. So the hukm is continuous unlike the ahkam of obeying parents where the hukm ends upon their death or the hukm of giving to the poor which ends when poverty ceases. But the obligation of having a Khaleefah over you never ceases because text says 'the one who dies' indicating the continuity of the hukm throughout the life of a person for he is not allowed to die in situation where the Khaleefah is not present.

What is the Hukm Shar'I on this issue? 

The above discussion allows us to extract two ahkaam: That it is Fard 'ayni (individual obligation) to have a Khaleefah present and that it is Fard Kifayah (obligation of sufficiency) to appoint a Khaleefah.

The first hukm is deduced from the request (talab) in the hadith that a Muslim should not die without a Khaleefah present. As we said before 'bay'ah on the neck' is not possible to have without the presence of the Khaleefah. So if it is not allowed to die without a bay'ah on the neck, this means it is not allowed to die without the presence of a Khaleefah. This type of indication (dalaalah) in Usul al-Fiqh is known as dalaalat al-Iqtidaa (the required meaning of the text). I.e. this is when the truthfulness or correctness of a statement (sidq al-mutakallim wa sihhatul malfooz bihi) cannot be established unless one understands the lafz (expression) in a certain way.

The mafhoom (implied meaning) of 'bayah on the neck' is the presence of the Khaleefah by the required meaning (dalalaatul iqtidaa). Thus for the expression 'bayah on the neck' to be truthful we must understand it to mean presence of the Khaleefah.

Thus, the one who dies without the presence of the Khaleefah would be sinful due to the qaraa'in which makes the request decisive. The preposition 'fee unuqihi' actually means 'ala unuqihi ie obligation to have on one's neck much like when we say in English someone has 'a debt on his neck' i.e. he has a debt he has to pay. 

In addition to this is the explicit qareenah (indication) 'dies the death of Jahiliiayh'. The attribution of a death occurring in the days of Ignorance establishes beyond any doubt the decisiveness of the request. This means the command is a Fard which if neglected would entail sin and punishment. Also, since the personal pronoun 'man' is general this means it includes every single Muslim i.e. every individual faces death and therefore the indefinite term 'maata' i.e. dies, coupled with the negation is clear that every single individual is addressed and hence it is a Fard 'ayni (individual obligation) to have a Khaleefah present.

Further proof can be found in other supporting daleel. It is narrated on the authority of 'Umar that the Messenger (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

''The One who dies without an Imam he dies the death of Jahiliyyah''. [Reported on the authority of 'Umar by at-Tabarani and Abu Nu'aym. The latter declared the hadith as authentic]

Yet in another hadith narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Umar by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak we have the following version:

''He who abandons the Jamaa'ah by even so much as a hand span is as if he has taken the knot of Islam off his neck, until he returns.' And he (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: 'whoever dies while there was no Imaam of a Jamaa'ah ruling over him, his death would be that of the days of Jahiliyyah.''

It well known the scholars of hadith permitted the narration of hadith by meaning (riwayah bilma'na). So in the above hadiths the raawi (transmitter) narrated the meaning of the saying of the Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam). So whilst the extraction of the hukm from the man maata hadith in Sahih Muslim is from the implicit meaning (mafhoom), the above two hadiths however are even more explicit as they make the same point in the uttered meaning (manTooq). Incidentally, the hadith in Sahih Muslim and the one above from al-Hakim are both narrated by Ibn 'Umar. The first says 'bay'ah on the neck' while the second says 'while there was no Imaam of a Jamaa'ah ruling over him'. The meaning is same but the difference is that the former is understood from the implicit meaning (mafhoom) while the latter is taken from the uttered or pronounced meaning (mantooq).

As for the second hukm which is that it is Fard to appoint a Khaleefah, this is deduced from the dalalaatul Ishaarah (the alluded meaning of the text). The ishaarah is a hukm derived from the text which was not intended directly from the speech. The 'man maata' hadith establishes the obligation of having a Khaleefah present; this means by ishaarah that it is an obligation to appoint a Khaleefah. Therefore, when the text says it is Fard to have a Khaleefah present it also alludes to the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah such that he is present over us. 

CONCLUSION

Thus, this hadith clearly establishes the obligation of having a Khaleefah over us and the obligation of working to appoint a Khaleefah. 

On WHOM does the Hukm shar'i apply? Is it an individual (Fard 'ayni) or collective obligation (Fard kifaa`i) and what does that mean for the Muslim?

The obligation of having a Khaleefah present is an individual duty. This is because the personal pronoun 'man' (which means whoever) is from the general expression (seeghatul 'umoom) and it encompasses all people. Its nature is such that if the Khaleefah is present then he is present for all and if he is absent then he is absent for all thus the obligation covers all people. It is well known in Usul that the general remains general until there is another evidence to specify it. The insane, non-baligh are excluded from this generality because there is a text to say they are not legally responsible (ghayr mukallaf) and hence they cannot be held responsible for duties they did not have capacity for.

He (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

''Three types of people are exempted from accountability, the one who sleeps until he wakes up, a child until he reaches the age of puberty and the insane until he is cured.''[Reported by Abu Dawood]

Thus, the general remains in its generality unless another text comes to specify it. And in this case the obligation of having a Khaleefah present is on every legally responsible (mukallaf) Muslim whether man, woman, layman or scholar.

As for the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah this is Fard kifaayah (obligation of sufficiency). However this should not be taken as an excuse for inaction. This is because in terms of obligation (wujoob) and removal of the sin (isqaat) the Fard 'ayn and kifayah are the same. This is because Fard means the Legislator has demanded in a decisive form the performance of an action which if neglected will result in sin. Thus the obligation to fulfil the command is on all. Only if the command has been fulfilled by some then the sin is removed from the rest. This is because the consideration is for the accomplishment of the Fard and not the undertaking of the Fard. Until and unless the Fard is accomplished it continues to be an obligation on all no matter how many people undertook it. That is why the definition of Fard kifayah is: 'What some have accomplished then the rest are absolved from sin' (maa aqaamuhul ba'd saqata 'anil baaqeen) not 'what some have undertaken …' (maa qaama bihil ba'd). There is a big difference between undertaking an action and accomplishing it. So until the Fard is accomplished the obligation remains on all. That is why if the kifayah obligation neglected everyone is sinful and not just a few people.

For example it is Fard Kifayah for a group to respond when salam is given to them. The obligation remains on all of them until the obligation is fulfilled. If one responds with the salam and the Fard is accomplished then all are saved from sin because the consideration is the accomplishment of the Fard but if no one respond then all are sinful. Thus Fard kifayah and 'ayn are the same in obligation and removal of the sin.

So, in our view, it would be incorrect for someone to say the duty to re-establish the Khilafah is Fard kifayah - so let some people do it and we will be saved – because the Fard has not been accomplished and hence the obligation remains on every single neck. The Ummah has only three days and two nights to choose a Khaleefah, if they fail to do this after this time the obligation continues on all and those who undertake the Fard are saved from the sin. But those who neglect will be sinful for not fulfilling their Lord's command and they will have to explain themselves to Him on the Day when His Account (Hisab) is swift.

Fatwa against Zardari.

On the President of Pakistan, the army, the Imams who support aggression against Muslims & their sympathisers
And sincere advice on how to change the situation
according to the Qur’an & Sunnah (according to the understanding of the Sahabah)
Introduction
All praise is for Almighty Allah (SWT) the Lord of the worlds. There is no animosity except against the oppressors and occupiers and victory is for the Muttaqeen (the pious). I bear witness that there is no one truly worthy of worship except Allah, the one who sent his Messenger with guidance and the Deen of truth, in order to make the Deen prevail over all others, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His messenger, the slave of Allah, the Prophet of mercy and the prophet of war, to whom Allah granted victory through terrorising his enemy, from one month’s distance and who designated his provision under the shade of his spear and decreed humiliation and destruction for the one who disobeys His orders.
After the invasion of Iraq and now Afghanistan the hidden agenda of the American government and its alliance in Pakistan has become clear for all, whether they are near to or far from the region. This agenda is the destruction of Islam. This is manifested in the speech of many American senators who could not keep their intentions secret.
It is natural to hear that the Kuffaar (i.e. the non-Muslims) are fighting the believers because the animosity of the Kuffaar towards Muslims is a divine tradition which will always remain, as Allah (SWT) says in the Qur’an:
“…And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your Deen (Islam) if they can…” [EMQ 2: 217]
The divine wisdom of Allah (SWT) necessitates that the believers will be tested by the disbelievers, and the disbelievers will be tested by the believers, in order for those who will obey him and fight for his sake, to prevail. The one who declines and allies with the disbelievers, following their path, will be doomed in hellfire, for Allah (SWT) says:
“If Allah wished, you would be victorious over them, but (he lets you fight) in order to test some of you with others. But those who are killed in the way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost.” [EMQ 47: 4]
Therefore we must not be surprised that the disbelievers are planning to destroy Islam and Muslims, because that is one of their main tasks, even though it is impossible for them to achieve, because their plot will always be exposed until the day of judgement. As Allah (SWT) says:
“We will test you in order to see who the Mujaahid among you is and who are firm …” [EMQ 47: 31]
Nobody can argue about the animosity of the disbelievers towards the believers, and their plot against them, except theignorant i.e. those whose opinion is meaningless. However, what is surprising is to see so-called Muslims going astray having been misled by those who are impressed with the disbelievers and their plots, and surely nobody is impressed by the disbelievers but the ignorant.
Part of the ignorance and apostasy we see is that Muslims allywith the disbelievers and join their forces. They spend time and effort in order to stand with the disbelievers and to harm Muslims in Iraq, in Afghanistan and in Palestine etc…
‘ Whoever rules and judges by other than what Allah (SWT) has revealed is a kaafir’ [EMQ 5:44] and
also
‘Whoever allies with them (supports non-Muslims against Muslims) is one of them’ [EMQ 5:51]
Mr Zardari is also someone who has the blood of thousands of Muslims on his hand, being personally responsible for murdering them via his brutal right hand the ISI (secret service of Pakistan)
“O Believers, do not take the Jews and Christians as an alliance, they are only allies to each other, and whosoever allies with them, he is one of them, and Allah does not guide the oppressors.” [EMQ 5: 51-52]
This alliance with the Kuffaar (disbelievers) can be one of two;either they will be sinful if they stand with the Kuffaar or they will become apostates if they engage in fighting against Muslims. Some Muslims in the Pakistan army participate with them in fighting against their Muslim brothers in Afghanistan.This is clear naked aggression against all Muslims, and Muslims are obliged to reject it and resist it and fight them as a matter of obligation to resist the occupation.
As for those Muslims who join the army, they will thereby be sinful and if any one of them fights side-by-side with the UK and US forces against Muslims, they will become apostates, being at war, as they are, with Islam and Muslims, and their life and wealth will have no sanctity. They will be treated like the disbelievers as clear enemies to Islam and Muslims. Moreover if they die they will die outside of the fold of Islam, and they will never be dignified in their death nor buried with the Muslims.
Therefore we warn the Muslims wherever they are, particularly those Muslims in Pakistan, not to offer any support, moral, financial, militarily or physical in the onslaught against Islam and Muslims in the region, though theenemies may attempt to take Muslims onto their side. Allah (SWT) designated people in this Ummah that will direct othersthat go astray, May Allah protect us all.
And for those who go to fight Muslims in Afghanistan, remember that the Prophet (saw) forbade Muslims from pointing even a small knife at another Muslim, even as a joke, when he (saw) said:
“Whoever points a small knife or piece of metal jokingly towards his Muslim brother, the angels will curse him and he will never smell paradise.”
Let alone being involved in carrying machine guns, and driving tanks with the US army, arresting and imprisoning Muslims or fighting and killing them. Those from whose hand Muslims will never be secure, although the Messenger Muhammad (saw) said:
“A Muslim is the one from whose hand and tongue his Muslim brother is secure
‘ O you who believe, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you, and if you differ in anything then refer it back to Allah and his Messenger if you believe in Allah and the hereafter ’ [EMQ 4:59]
These people spy on Muslims, fight them and even try to deceive them. We ask them to give up their apostasy immediately. For Allah (SWT) says:
“And from mankind there are some who say: ‘We believe in Allah and the Last day’ while in fact they do not believe. They think to deceive Allah and those who believe, while they only deceive themselves, but they perceive not.” [EMQ 2: 8-9]
One of their deceptions is that they claim to be believers, yet they spy on Muslims or they go to fight them, or they report against them to the Kuffaar. If they claim to do so as no more than a job, we remind them of the saying of the Messenger Muhammad (saw), who said:
“Whoever earns a bite of food by reporting or spying on Muslims, Allah will feed him the equivalent in the hellfire, and whoever wears clothes earnt from spying against Muslims, Allah will clothe him with hellfire.” [Narrated in Sahih Al-Bukhari, in Kitab ul-Adab]
Call for action:
We hereby urge all Muslims in Pakistan with any authority or dignity to hand authority to the Ulema of Pakistan in order to implement the Khilafah, the only ruling system allowed by the Shari'ah i.e. Islamic Law, just as the Ansar handed authority to the Messenger Muhammad (saw) when he first established the Islamic State in Madina.
It is clear that putting our affairs into the hands of secularists will never bring Islamic law to Pakistan rather it will continuethe hegemony of Man-made law conveniently cloaked in the guise of such sound-bites as "Islamic Democracy" and"constitutional Reform".
Pakistan, created for the establishment of Islam, does not require an amendment to its Kufr constitution, which gives democracy (i.e. Law by man over man) precedence over the Shari'ah, but a revolution which eradicates all law emanating from any Man-made source, to be replaced by one leader managing the affairs of the people, both Muslim and non-Muslim exclusively in accordance with divine law. It is inconceivable that a government which bases itself on irreligious principles and democracy could ever find itself in a position to declare itself an Islamic state the very antithesis ofits illegitimacy as a government dedicated to its own profane existence as a secular state.
Enough is enough, let us be rid of these liars and oppressors once and for all.
Take the following action immediately:
1. Cease all embassies and foreign ambassadors immediately whether they belong to Western dictatorial regimes or other countries
2. Reject any intervention from foreign government or international bodies such as the UN, OIC, EU, NATO etc…
3. Declare the Kufr constitution of Pakistan null and void and the supremacy of the Shari'ah alone as a khilafah system of government
4. Do not aim your weapons at your Muslim brothers and do not target civilians rather aim your weapons at the occupyingforces and whoever stands in the way of implementing the rule of Allah.
5. Declare the removal of all borders and the invitation to all Muslims to become citizens of the khilafah i.e. the Islamic State. Unite our Muslim land of Afghanistan and Pakistan to bethe precursor of greater unity under the Khilafah.
6. Give authority to those to whom it rightly belongs. Let the Muslims through the general assembly of the U'lama (Juristic Islamic scholars) elect a brave Khalifah to rule by what Allah has revealed and who you know will declare Jihad against theenemies of Allah, his Messenger and the Muslims and who willrule according to the way of the Khulafah Rashidoun.
7. Carry the Islamic message to the entire world, we are an Ummah which lives so that we can carry the message unlike other Nations who survive without any mission.
Significant steps in the changes to the law and order of Pakistan
The Messenger Muhammad (saw) said: " Whoever wakes up without caring about the affairs of the Muslims is not one of them " and Allah (swt) says: " Let there rise from among you group(s) calling society to Islam, commanding society to do what Allah orders and to refrain from what he forbids… " [EMQ3:104].
The highest good being to call to implement the Tawheed of Islam and the highest evil being to associate partners with Allah (SWT) by not implementing Islamic law. The Messenger Muhammad (saw) ordered us to give sincere advice to those in positions of authority and said: " Deen is advice " to which the Sahabah replied: " To whom, O Rasoul Allah? " and He said:" For Allah and his Messenger and for the rulers and the generalpublic "
Islam is the only correct ideology which Allah (swt) has ordered us to rule and to govern our lives with. Allah (swt) says in the Qur'an: " Rule between them by whatever Allah has revealed and do not follow their desires " [EMQ 5: 49] therefore we have decided to take the initiative and to offer you the Islamic constitution which has been studied by intellectual Muslim scholars and experts in Islamic law who have derived its articles from the Qur'an and the Sunnah of The Messenger Muhammad (saw) in order that you may studyit, adopt it and implement it and so that you may lead Pakistan out from its domination by Kufr into its domination by Islam.
Due to the fact that there is not enough space here for more details we have summarised the Islamic project for you below which we urge you to read. We are willing to meet youand to discuss with you all its details and evidences and to elaborate on how to implement it. The first step you must take is to abolish all the existing constitution and to implement the Islamic constitution which is summarised below.
Here is a summary of the essential action that must be taken at different levels, whether ruling, economic, social, internal or external, including national security:
At the level of the ruling system:
=============================================================
At the level of the Economic system:
=============================================================
At the level of the Foreign Policy:
=============================================================
At the level of the War policy:
=============================================================
At the level of the Education policy:
=============================================================
At the level of the Social system:
=============================================================
At the level of the Judicial system:
=============================================================
These are the main guidelines about the systems of life, which need to be observed and implemented in order to please Allah (swt) and which will guarantee the happiness, the tranquillity and the dignity of man. They will lead to the elevation of man and to the revival of the Muslims and the Islamic State in order for it to carry Islam to the world and to dominate the entire world by Islam so that it forms the Islamic world order where Muslims and non Muslims will live under the eyes of the world wide Islamic State and be citizensregardless of their religion, colour, race and language. Allah (swt) said: " You are the best Nation ever raised for Mankind because you command good and forbid evil and believe in Allah and the hereafter " [EMQ 3:110] .
Indeed we are an Ummah of Jihad and beyond doubt we havebeen chosen by God to lead the whole world if we hold to his command i.e. His revelation. SMay Allah (SWT) be witness thatwe called you to fulfil your duty of establishing the Khilafah and to bring an end to all those working as spies, police, soldiers, ministers and politicians for the Taghout.
Oh Allah , be the witness that we have conveyed the message.

Those who do not rule by what Allah has revealed.

Bismillah al-Rahman al-Raheem

Question:

...

Allah (swt) says: “Those who do not rule by what Allah has revealed are disbelievers.”[5-44] hence, this is the verdict of Allah on those who rule by other than what He (swt) revealed stipulating that they are Kuffar. He (swt) does not refer to the doctrinal aspect; He (swt) rather issues the rule and does not restrict it. Hence, on what basis does the Party say that those who rule by other than what Allah has revealed do not become Kuffar unless they believe in what they do?

Answer:

This ayah and the other two ayat: “Those who do not rule by what Allah has revealed are transgressors” and “Those who do not rule by what Allah has revealed are rebels”, were revealed on the Kuffar and not the Muslims. However, since the arabic pronoun “mann” -meaning ‘who’ – denotes generality, and since it is an expression of generality, in addition to the fact that the ayah ends with an indication of generality, this proves that the Muslims are also included; thus the ayah addresses them as well. It is therefore not typically part of the Sharia’h of our ancestors because if a passage of the Qur’an addresses those who came before us, but also accompanied by a Qarinah (conjunction) indicating that it is for us, in this case it will be for us the Muslims just like it was for our ancestors; it is part of our Shari’ah and it applies to the Muslims as well as the Kuffar.

However, the fact that the Muslim who rules by other than what Allah has revealed does not become Kafir unless he believes in what he does is corroborated by several Qarinah(s) indicating that what turns him into a Kafir is the belief in other than what Allah has revealed and not the mere ruling. First, the three ayat were revealed following one single event; thus, Allah (swt)’s saying “rebels and wrongdoers” acts as a Qarinah indicating that His saying “disbelievers” is in reference to those who believe in Kufr. The topic is the same, namely ruling by other than what Allah has revealed but the attributes are various, namely Kufr, rebellion and wrongdoing. Hence, each one of the three descriptions represents without a doubt a different situation, and this situation is then described accordingly. Believing is a situation, which if coupled with the ruling by other than what Allah has revealed, the ruler would be Kafir; if the situation were not present, he would be either a rebel or a wrongdoer. If he ruled by other than what Allah has revealed but not believing in it and if he gave each one his due, he would be a rebel because he ruled by other than what Allah has revealed, but he would not be a Kafir or a wrongdoer. If he ruled by other than what Allah has revealed without believing in what he ruled by and without giving people their due rights, he would then be a rebel and a wrongdoer; a rebel for committing the sin of ruling by other than what Allah has revealed and a wrongdoer because he infringed the rights of the people. Hence, the variety of attributes in one topic acts as a Qarinah indicating that Allah’s saying “they are the disbelievers” means if they believed in it. This is similar to the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (saw) on the forsaker of Salat in which he said: “He who forsakes it becomes a Kafir.” Despite this, the neglecter of Salat does not become a Kafir unless he forsakes it and he does not believe that it is obligatory.

Second, the three ayat were revealed on the Kuffar and came after describing their Kufr; hence, the generalisation would apply to the like of them not to all people, because the Shari’ah principle of “the precept is in the generality of the expression and not in the specifics of the cause” is confined to the topic upon which it was revealed and does not extend to the generality of everything it may apply to. The topic in this context is the Kuffar rejecting what was revealed to them and not ruling according to it; thus they rejected what was revealed to them. The fact that they rejected what was revealed to them and ruled by other than what Allah revealed while believing in what they ruled by, they became consequently Kuffar. Hence, those who rule not by what Allah has revealed and they reject it as well are Kuffar. It would be wrong to claim that the topic in this context is related to ruling by other than what Allah has revealed because this contradicts the event on which the ayah was revealed. The ayah was revealed regarding the Jews’ rejection of stoning the adulterer and their ruling by other than that, which was lashing. Hence, the topic consists of two issues: First, rejecting of what Allah (swt) revealed to them because they deemed unsuitable; second: ruling by other than what Allah has revealed; thus, the rejection was a fundamental condition in deeming them Kuffar for ruling by other than what Allah has revealed.

Third: ruling is an action and not an Aqeedah matter. If the action contradicted what Allah (swt) has commanded, it would be a sin and not Kufr, unless the action itself is Kufr; the action could either be according to what Allah has ordered in terms of rules or contrary to what He has ordered in terms of Aqeedah; thus, if it were contrary to what Allah (swt) ordered in terms of rules, it would be a sin and not Kufr, unless there is a conclusive text that is decisive in meaning proving that it is Kufr. For instance, we have been ordered to obey our parents but the order does not include an order to believe; thus, if one were to disobey his parents he would be sinful and not Kafir. However, we have been ordered to believe in the “Sujud” (prostrating) to Allah and we have been ordered to act accordingly on the basis of that belief. Consequently, if a Muslim prostrated to a statue or if he prayed in the church, he would become Kafir because “there is no god but Allah”, in which we have been ordered to believe i.e. there is none worshipped but Allah; thus, performing other than this would be Kufr.

However, if a Muslim neglected an action of Salat, such as al-Qunut, he would not be sinful and if he neglected the prostration, his prayer would be invalid. Hence, contradicting the commands of Allah (swt) would not be Kufr unless the contradiction is coupled with the belief that the commands are allegedly invalid or with the rejection of these commands. The Legislator has commanded the doctrines and has also commanded the actions; the rule of those who contradict the order to believe differs from the rule of those who contradict the order to perform an action. Since, the ruling by other than what Allah has revealed is contradictory to the command to perform an action, and not contradictory to the command to believe, it is therefore deemed a sin and not Kufr.

The reality of ruling by other than what Allah has revealed is that it is not an action of Kufr for two reasons: Shari’ah has not described it as Kufr; thus it cannot be deemed as an action of Kufr; this is corroborated by the fact that Mu’awiyah took the pledge of allegiance for Yazid through coercion under the gaze and within earshot of the Sahaba; it was a rule by other than what Allah has revealed and yet, we do not know of anyone claiming that Mu’awiyah became Kafir. Secondly, the rule by other than what Allah has revealed is not a branch of Aqeedah such as the prostrating to a statue or the prayer with the Christians; thus it is not a Kufr action; it is of the type of contradicting what Allah has ordered not the type of what Allah has ordered us to believe in. For instance, if a ruler were biased towards one of his relatives who committed theft and sentenced him to a prison term instead of cutting his hand off, he would be sinful and not a Kafir; whereas if he sentenced a thief to a prison term and not cut his hand because he rejects the rule of cutting the hand and because he believes that cutting the hand is wrong and the prison term is sound, he would be Kafir. Hence, both the rulers ruled by other than what Allah has revealed and both rules amounted to ruling by other than what Allah has revealed, and yet there is a difference between them: the former is sinful and the latter is Kafir. The difference between them lies in the Aqeedah issue; if the ruling by other than what Allah has revealed were an act of Kufr, the verdict on both rulers would be the same. Hence, ruling by other than what Allah has revealed is not deemed an act of Kufr but rather an action like any other which is deemed a sin

The Fardiyyah of the Khilafah

The obligation we are about to discuss is something the Muslims took for granted, for well over a thousand years, much like the obligation of Salah (prayer) and fasting today which, al-hamdu lillah, are not open to discussion and debate. However the Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) did warn us there would come a time when the Deen will become strange and unrecognizable to the people and those carrying its Call will be seen as strange due to the Message that they carry.

He (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:
''Islam began strange and it shall return strange. So glad tiding to the Strangers.'' [Reported by Muslim]
This hadith holds a meaning that is especially reflective of our times, for in the last hundred years this noble Ummah has witnessed the destruction of her State and with that, due to the colonization of her lands by the colonialists, the crushing tidal wave of the western culture. The western culture completely engulfed her to the point of suffocation. It turned black into white and white into black. Never did the Ummah encounter such cultural strangulation, which left her bewildered and confused about the most basic and rudimentary tenets of her Deen. To cause maximum damage the colonialists chose their targets carefully when they unleashed their degenerate culture upon us: they attacked the notion of one Ummah by disseminating the idea of nationalism and nationhood. The Sharee'ah was depicted as barbaric, harking back to a medieval age but not suited to an age of reason and modernity. Whilst the ruling system of Islam, the Islamic Khilafah, was nothing short of despotism justified under the name of religion.
So what impact did this western polemic have upon the sons of this Ummah? First of all the effect was mostly noticeable amongst the scholars, authors and men of letters. Some answered back but with an apologetic tone – so the Khilafah was deemed to be a democratic system all along– whilst a handful who had succumbed to the western culture even denied it as having any Sharee'ah legitimacy, such as the likes of 'Ali Abd ar-Raaziq who, which will come as no surprise, was influenced by none other than the Kaafir orientalist Sir Thomas Arnold! For example in his book: 'al-Islam wa Usul al-Hukm' after attempting to prove that there is no daleel (evidence) for Khilafah in the Ayah:
''O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from amongst you'' [4:59]
he says on page 11: 'If you want to find out more on this discussion then please refer to the book 'The Caliphate' by the scholar Sir Thomas Arnold. The explanation in chapter two and three of that book is excellent and convincing' This book, quite opportunely it seems, was published a year after the Khilafah was destroyed in 1925. In it he went to great pains to argue that the above and other such hadith and ayat which command the obedience to a Khaleefah do not establish the obligation to appoint a Khaleefah because they apply only when an imam exists and if he does not exist then there is no obligation to appoint one. To prove this he adduced the following breathtaking argument: 'Are we not ordered by the Sharee'ah to be generous to beggars, respect the poor and treat them well and show kindness to them? So can anyone who has any intelligence say that this means the Sharee'ah has obliged us to bring about paupers and orphans?' [al-Islam wa Usul al-Hukm' pp.125-126, in edition published by al-Mu`assasa al-'Arabiyyah lid dirasaat wan nashr.]
In time a sense of apathy towards the issue of Khilafah reigned over the Ummah and in cases even embarrassment. Many saw the Khilafah as a relic of the past and which should remain in the past or simply impossible to implement in this day and age; hence there was no alternative but to make recourse to secularism. This was a time of great turmoil and change for the Ummah. This is the time when we witnessed the hadith of the Messenger (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) unfolding before our eyes when he (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:
''Verily, the knots of Islam will be undone one by one. Whenever one knot is lost then the people grabbed onto the one which came after it. The first of these knots will be the Ruling and the last will be the Salah.'' [Reported by At-Tabaraani]
And in another version:
''Verily, the knots of Islam will be undone and there shall be misguided rulers.'' [Authenticated by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak]
After losing the Khilafah, like people clutching at whatever they can on a sinking ship, the Ummah grabbed onto whatever remained of the Deen as poignantly depicted in the hadith above. However, the good is, and always will be, in this Ummah and it was not long before she started embarking on the path of awakening due to the work of the sincere Da'wah carriers. One by one she began to reclaim the knots she had lost and now she is poised to reclaim that final knot; the knot of Ruling by Islam.
Today, by Allah's Grace and Mercy, the notion of Khilafah is not strange to the Ummah, except to those of course who have been inebriated by the western culture. However, it is important to go beyond the recognition of this obligation and to familiarize ourselves with its detailed evidences. Like all other obligations it should be anchored deep within the hearts and minds of the Ummah such that it can never be expunged from her memory again.
The hadith of our times
The evidences for Khilafah are many. But the evidence I wish to discuss perfectly describes our reality today: which is that we live at a time when no Khaleefah exists. And that evidence is the hadith reported by Imam Muslim on the authority of Nafi' that the Messenger (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:
''The one who removes his hand from obedience he will meet Allah without a proof for himself' and Whosoever dies without a bay'ah on his neck dies the death of Jahiliyyah.''
This hadith provides the Hukm Shar'i for a situation when Muslims die without the presence of a Khaleefah to rule over them. Perhaps, this is what explains the Fuqahaa`s (jurists) relative silence over this hadith while the numerous other evidences which establish the obligation of Khilafah have received greater attention and scrutiny. In short, they could not imagine a situation when a Muslim would die without the presence of a Khaleefah; that was simply unthinkable! Hence the discussion tended to centre on the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah after the death of the previous Khaleefah. Or that it is obligatory to obey the existing Khaleefah and so having a Khaleefah must be obligatory.
However, one thing is for sure; the unthinkable has happened and the Khilafah has been destroyed and Muslims are dying while they have no Khaleefah over them. So what better evidence to start off with than the hadith which directly addresses our reality?
The process of extraction
What is the Manaat (reality) of the text?
The hadith is describing not one but two types of people since it came in two parts as indicated by the waw al-isti`naaf or ibtidaa` (in English the word 'and' is used) (ie the disjunctive syntax where the waw begins a new sentence) . In the first part it says 'The one who removes his hand from obedience he will meet Allah without a proof for himself' This is when the Khaleefah exists and someone withholds his obedience to the Khaleefah. As for the second part it is not describing the same person since the waw al- isti`naaf indicates it is beginning a new sentence to make a different point. This time he (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) says: And (waw al- isti`naaf) the one who dies without a bay'ah on his neck he dies the death of jahiliyyah' This is further confirmed by the fact that he repeats the personal pronoun 'man' (the one who or whosoever). This also indicates the hadith discusses two types of people in two different situations.
To appreciate this point better let us look at another hadith where exactly the same thing happens:
He (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: man maata fee sabeelillah fahuwa shaheed wa man maata bit-taa'oon fahuwa shaheed [sahih Muslim]
''The one who dies in the Path of Allah he is shaeed and (waw al- isti`naaf) the one who dies in a plague he is a shaeed''
The death here occurs in two states separated by the waw al- isti`naaf. So the first death is in the Path of Allah whilst the second death occurs in a plague. It would be absurd if someone claimed here that the hadith is talking about the same situation.
Thus the hadith in question is talking about two different situations. The first situation as we said is when someone withholds his obedience to the existing Khaleefah. But what about the second part? The second part begins by saying: 'the one who dies without a bay'ah on his neck..' The waw al-Haal (waw of condition) in wa laysa fi 'unuqihi bay'ah clarifies the state in which the person dies, and in this case it is when he dies 'without a bay'ah on his neck'.
So what is that state when someone does without a bay'ah on his neck. It can't mean giving the bay'ah because the hadith did not say 'wa lam yu'til bay'ah' (and he did not give the bay'ah) let alone the fact that giving the bay'ah (pledge) is a kifayah duty (sufficiency) and not an individual obligation in the first place as indicated by the Ijma' as-sahabah (consensus of the Sahabah).
What explains the meaning of bay'ah on the neck is the fact that the contractual bay'ah does not require every single person to physically give it, rather it is enough for the Ahlul Halli wal 'Aqd (those who represent the Muslims) to give the bay'ah on behalf of the people. This means that a person living even outside the Islamic authority has a bay'ah on his neck if a Khaleefah has been contracted to his post by the representatives of the Muslims. In fact this was the basic format in which all the Khulafaa' ar-Rashidoon were appointed. None of them were appointed by a bay'ah which was given by the whole of the population of the Islamic state, rather it was always the representatives of the Muslims who appointed them. For example when 'Umar b. al-Khattab was elected as Khaleefah by the ahlul halli wal a'qd in Madinah the people of ash-Sham and Egypt did not have to give the bay'ah because the bay'ah was on their neck by virtue of the fact that the contractual bay'ah had taken place through their representatives the ahlul halli wal aqd. Those who died in ash-Sham and Egypt during the Khilafah of 'Umar b. al-Khattab did not die the death of jahiliyyah because they had the bay'ah on their necks even though they did not come to Madinah and physically give the bay'ah themselves. This is the difference between giving the bay'ah and having the bay'ah on one's neck. If however the representatives of the Muslims in Madinah after 'Umar's death did not appoint a Khaleefah then the Muslims of ash-Sham and Egypt would not have the bay'ah on their necks because the contractual bay'ah had not taken place i.e. a Khaleefah had not been appointed.
Thus, the hadith is very accurate in its description; it is not talking about giving bay'ah to a Khaleefah but rather having a: 'Bay'ah on the neck for a Khaleefah' which describes a situation when someone dies without the presence of a Khaleefah. Hence it is wrong to argue that one cannot use this hadith to prove the obligation of Khilafah by claiming that it is talking about situation when the Khaleefah exists. Such an assertion is not established by the internal indications of the text which show that the Haal (condition) described is the death which occurs when a Khaleefah is not present.
As for Ali Abd ar-Raaziq's argument that Sharee'ah has obliged us to look after beggars and orphans so does that mean if they don't exist we have to bring them about to fulfill this command or the argument that we are obliged to obey parents so does that mean we are obliged to bring them back if they die?! Such arguments to say the least are highly fatuous and cannot be considered as scholarly opinions for they disregard the fact that the ahkaam (rules) come with their asbaab (causes). The sabab (cause) of obedience to parents is their existence and hence upon their death the sabab (cause) ceases which means the hukm of obedience also ceases. Also the same applies to beggars and orphans in respect to the ahkaams (rules) which came pertaining to them. But this is different when it comes to appointing a Khaleefah because the sabab (cause) of the presence of a Khaleefah is the presence of the Jama'ah i.e. Ummah or community which has to look after its affairs by Islam. So if the community exists then Khaleefah must exist to look after their affairs.
The Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said in a hadith that has been narrated by Imam Ahmed in his Musnad;
''It is not allowed for three people to be in a fulaatin (journey) without appointing one of them as an Ameer.''
This hadith makes it clear that whenever a collection of Muslims exist i.e. jamaa'ah it is prohibited for them to exist except with an ameer i.e. therefore it is an obligation to appoint an Ameer WHEN there is any jama'ah i.e. the existence of jama'ah is the sabab (cause) of the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah.
In fact the term jama'ah in the Islamic text means State, authority, and Khaleefah. Let us look at the following hadith: Ibn 'Abbas narrated that Messenger (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:
''The one who sees in his Ameer something which displeases him, let remain patient, for he who separates himself from the community (Jama'ah) by even so much as a hand span and dies (in this state), he will die the death of Jahiliyyah,'' (reported by Bukhari and Muslim.)
Here disobedience and rebellion against the Khaleefah is synonymous with separation from the Jama'ah. This is because it is obligatory on the Jama'ah to look after their affairs by Islam. Having a Khaleefah present means this duty is being fulfilled. But if he is disobeyed this means the obligation of looking after their affairs by Islam is being neglected since he is the one who undertakes this task. So the Jama'ah has to obey a Khaleefah so that their affairs can be looked after. The reason why a Khaleefah needs to exist is because the affairs cannot be looked after except by him. Thus, the sabab (cause) of the presence of a Khaleefah is the presence of Jamaa'ah which is obliged to look after its affairs by Islam. Hence, when the Messenger of Allah (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) orders us to obey the Khaleefah this means by Ishaarah (alluded meaning) it is obligatory to appoint a Khaleefah for how can the Fard (obligation) of ruling by Islam be accomplished if he did not exist. So it is wrong to say a Khaleefah does not exist so we are not sinful for not appointing and obeying the Khaleefah. This is because the sabab (cause) is not his existence, rather the sabab (cause) of his presence is the presence of a Jamaa'ah which is obliged to look after its affairs by Islam.
We can see the same point much more clearly in another narration by Ibn 'Abbas which uses the word Sultan instead of Jamaa'ah:
''If anybody sees in his Ameer something which displeases him, he should remain patient, for he who separates himself from the authority (Sultan) by even so much as a hand span and dies thereupon, he would die the death of the days of ignorance,''[Reported by Muslim]
Here we can see that separation from Jamaa'ah and authority (sultan) are used synonymously. Authority (sultan) means the body which looks after the affairs. Jamaa'ah refers to the community whose affairs are looked after by the Khaleefah. The key thing in both is the obligation of looking after of the affairs which occasions the presence of a Khaleefah.
Also it is reported that 'Umar b. al-Khattab said:
''There is no Islam without Jamaa'ah and there is not Jamaa'ah without Imaarah (leadership). And there is no Imaarah (leadership) without obedience.'' (Reported by ad-Darimi in his Sunan)
i.e. there is no looking after of the affairs of the Jamaa'ah or authority (sultan) without an ameer (Imaarah) and naturally there can be no Ameer when there is no obedience to him. So the Jamaa'ah in order to exist ie for its affairs to be looked after must appoint an Ameer. And consequently obedience to this Ameer is obligatory because the obligation of looking after the affairs is not possible without an Ameer. Thus, when the Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) ordered us to give allegiance (bay'ah) or obey the Khaleefah it has a greater meaning than when he orders us to feed the poor or look after our parents. We feed the poor because they are poor and we obey parents because they are parents. Thus when they cease to exist the hukm ceases. But our obedience to the Khaleefah is because he looks after the affairs of the Jamaa'ah which itself is an obligation. Thus when the Khaleefah dies the obligation of obedience to him does not cease because the sabab (cause) of the obedience still exists which is the looking after of the affairs. Hence, so as long as the cause of appointing a Khaleefah exists which is the presence of a Jamaa'ah whose affairs have to be looked after by Islam then the obligation of appointing him and obeying him remains even if he did not exist. This is the reason why the order to obey the Khaleefah by Ishaarah (alluded meaning) means the order to appoint him.
Let us consider the following ayah:
''O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from amongst you'' [4:59]
Here we are obliged to obey those in authority because they are the ones who look after the affairs. So obedience is due as long the ruler looks after the affairs by Islam. Since looking after affairs by Islam is Fard then the obedience to them indicates by Ihsraah that they need to exist. In another hadith this point is made even more clearer:
''Even if a slave was appointed over you who leads you with the Book of Allah then hear and obey.''[reported by Muslim]
Here to emphasis the obedience to the one who looks after the affairs we are commanded in the style of mubaalagha (exaggeration) to obey even if the ameer is a slave. I.e. obedience is due because he looks after the affairs which is an obligation. Hence the order to obey indicates by ishaarat an-nass (alluded meaning from the text) the obligation of his presence.
Otherwise we are saying the hukm does not have be fulfilled because something necessary for its fulfillment does not exist even the though the sabab (cause) of the hukm still exists! For example if we apply this type of erroneous thinking on other ahkams look what happens: Jihad for instance is an obligation whose sabab (cause) is the presence of Kuffar under the authority of Kufr. So if Kuffar exist under dar al-kufr then Jihad exists. However to fulfill the Jihad one requires an Ameer by Iqtidaa (required meaning). Without an Ameer jihad cannot be undertaken and hence appointment of an Ameer becomes obligatory in order to fulfill Jihad because that which is necessary to fulfill a wajib is itself a waajib. So by Iqtidaa the presence of an Ameer becomes waajib. But if we follow the silly logic mentioned above the conclusion would be Jihad is not Fard because an Ameer does not exist! Such a conclusion is completely wrong because the sabab (cause) which caused the obligation of Jihad to exist is not the presence of an Ameer but the presence of Kuffar in Dar al-kufr. So as long as kuffar exist the Fard of jihad exists regardless of an Ameer's presence. Rather what we take from the existence of the Fard is that a Ameer needs to be appointed in order to fulfill the obligation.
Finally, the use of the expression 'man maata' deserves a further comment. The reference to the point of death indicates that the hukm (rule) must exist throughout his life. There cannot be a point in his life when he is in a state without a bay'ah on his neck i.e. without the presence of a Khaleefah. So the hukm is continuous unlike the ahkam of obeying parents where the hukm ends upon their death or the hukm of giving to the poor which ends when poverty ceases. But the obligation of having a Khaleefah over you never ceases because text says 'the one who dies' indicating the continuity of the hukm throughout the life of a person for he is not allowed to die in situation where the Khaleefah is not present.
What is the Hukm Shar'i?
The legislative value of the above discussion is that it allows us to extract two hukms: that it is Fard 'ayni (individual obligation) to have a Khaleefah present and also that it is Fard Kifayah (obligation of sufficiency) to appoint a Khaleefah.
As for the first hukm it is deduced from the request (talab) in the hadith that a Muslim should not die without a Khaleefah present. As we said before 'bay'ah on the neck' is not possible to have without the presence of the Khaleefah. So if it is not allowed to die without a bay'ah on the neck, this means it is not allowed to die without the presence of a Khaleefah. This type of indication (dalaalah) in Usul al-Fiqh is known as dalaalat al-Iqtidaa (the required meaning of the text). I.e. this is when the truthfulness or correctness of a statement (sidq al-mutakallim wa sihhatul malfooz bihi) cannot be established unless one understands the lafz (expression) in a certain way.
For example:
''And never will Allah grant to the disbelievers a way over the believers.''[4:141]
Here the mantooq (pronounced meaning) is Allah will not allow the kaafir to have authority over the believers. However, is this permission in terms of the occurrence of authority or prohibition of authority? It cannot be the fist because we know the kuffar in actuality have authority over the believers in Palestine and Kashmir so the only meaning which will give truthfulness to the statement is prohibition. So we say the mafhoom (implicit meaning) of this ayah through dalalat al-iqtidaa (required meaning) is that Allah prohibits that Kuffar have authority over the believers.
In the same manner the mafhoom (implied meaning) of 'bayah on the neck' is the presence of the Khaleefah by the required meaning (dalalaatul iqtidaa). Thus for the expression 'bayah on the neck' to be truthful we must understand it to mean presence of the Khaleefah.
Thus, the one who dies without the presence of the Khaleefah would be sinful due to the qaraa'in which make the request decisive. For example the preposition 'fee unuqihi' actually means 'ala unuqihi ie obligation to have on one's neck much like when we say in English someone has 'a debt on his neck' i.e. he has a debt he has to pay. We can also see the use of the 'ala in the following hadith of Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:
wa 'alayka bis sam'I wat taa'ah fee 'usrika wa yusrika wa manshitika wa makrahika wa atharatin 'alayk
''It is obligatory for you ('alayka) to hear and obey the ruler in adversity and prosperity, in pleasure and displeasure, and even when another person is given (rather undue) preference over you.'' [Reported by Muslim in his Sahih/num:1836]
In addition to this is the explicit qareenah (indication) 'dies the death of Jahiliiayh'. The attribution of a death occurring in the days of Ignorance establishes beyond any doubt the decisiveness of the request. This means the command is a Fard which if neglected would entail sin and punishment. Also, since the personal pronoun 'man' is general this means it includes every single Muslim i.e. every individual faces death and therefore the indefinite term 'maata' i.e. dies, coupled with the negation is clear that every single individual is addressed and hence it is a Fard 'ayni (individual obligation) to have a Khaleefah present.
As a further proof of the above understanding let us look at other narrations of the same hadith. It has been narrated on the authority of 'Umar that the Messenger (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:
''The One who dies without an Imam he dies the death of Jahiliyyah''. [Reported on the authority of 'Umar by at-Tabarani and Abu Nu'aym. The latter declared the hadith as authentic]
Yet in another hadith narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Umar by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak we have the following version:
''He who abandons the Jamaa'ah by even so much as a hand span is as if he has taken the knot of Islam off his neck, until he returns.' And he (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: 'whoever dies while there was no Imaam of a Jamaa'ah ruling over him, his death would be that of the days of Jahiliyyah.''
It well known the scholars of hadith permitted the narration of hadith by meaning (riwayah bilma'na). So in the above hadiths the raawi (transmitter) narrated the meaning of the saying of the Prophet (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam). So whilst the extraction of the hukm from the man maata hadith in Sahih Muslim is from the implicit meaning (mafhoom), the above two hadiths however are even more explicit as they make the same point in the uttered meaning (manTooq). Incidentally, the hadith in Sahih Muslim and the one above from al-Hakim are both narrated by Ibn 'Umar. The first says 'bay'ah on the neck' while the second says 'while there was no Imaam of a Jamaa'ah ruling over him'. The meaning is same but the difference is that the former is understood from the implicit meaning (mafhoom) while the latter is taken from the uttered or pronounced meaning (mantooq).
As for the second hukm which is that it is Fard to appoint a Khaleefah, this is deduced from the dalalaatul Ishaarah (the alluded meaning of the text). The ishaarah is a hukm derived from the text which was not intended directly from the speech.
For example when Allah (Subhanahu wa ta'ala) says:
''He were are commanded to ask those who know if we do not know.''
This cannot be done without the presence of Mujtahideen and hence the presence of mujtahideen in every age obligation in order to find out the sharee'ah rule on a matter. The ayah did not directly mention the obligation of having mujtahideen but it is understood from the ishaarah when it commanded us to ask those who know if we do not know. In the same manner the 'man maata' hadith establishes the obligation of having a Khaleefah present, this means by ishaarah that it is an obligation to appoint a Khaleefah. Therefore, when the text says it is Fard to have a Khaleefah present it also alludes to the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah such that he is present over us.
Thus, the above hadith clearly establishes the obligation of having a Khaleefah over us and the obligation of working to appoint a Khaleefah.
On WHOM does the Hukm shar'i apply? Is it an individual (Fard 'ayni) or collective obligation (Fard kifaa`i) and what does that mean for the Muslim ?
The obligation of having a Khaleefah present is an individual duty. This is because the personal pronoun 'man' ( which means whoever) is from the general expression (seeghatul 'umoom) and it encompasses all people. Its nature is such that if the Khaleefah is present then he is present for all and if he is absent then he is absent for all thus the obligation covers all people. It is well known in Usul that the general remains general until there is another evidence to specify it. Yes the insane, non-baligh are excluded from this generality but that is not from the mind but there is a text to say they are not legally responsible (ghayr mukallaf) and hence they cannot be held responsible for duties they did not have capacity for.
He (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:
''Three types of people are exempted from accountability, the one who sleeps until he wakes up, a child until he reaches the age of puberty and the insane until he is cured.''[Reported by Abu Dawood]
Thus, the general remains in its generality unless another text comes to specify it. And in this case the obligation of having a Khaleefah present is on every legally responsible (mukallaf) Muslim whether man, woman, layman or scholar.
As for the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah this is Fard kifaayah (obligation of sufficiency). However this should not be taken as an excuse for inaction. This is because in terms of obligation (wujoob) and removal of the sin (isqaat) the Fard 'ayn and kifayah are the same. This is because Fard means the Legislator has demanded in a decisive form the performance of an action which if neglected will result in sin. Thus the obligation to fulfill the command is on all. Only if the command has been fulfilled by some then the sin is removed from the rest. This is because the consideration is for the accomplishment of the Fard and not the undertaking of the Fard. Until and unless the Fard is accomplished it continues to be an obligation on all no matter how many people undertook it. That is why the definition of Fard kifayah is: 'What some have accomplished then the rest are absolved from sin' (maa aqaamuhul ba'd saqata 'anil baaqeen) not 'what some have undertaken …' (maa qaama bihil ba'd). There is a big difference between undertaking an action and accomplishing it. So until the Fard is accomplished the obligation remains on all. That is why if the kifayah obligation neglected everyone is sinful and not just a few people.
For example it is Fard Kifayah for a group to respond when salam is given to them. The obligation remains on all of them until the obligation is fulfilled. If one responds with the salam and the Fard is accomplished then all are saved from sin because the consideration is the accomplishment of the Fard but if no one respond then all are sinful. Thus Fard kifayah and 'ayn are the same in obligation and removal of the sin.
So it is wrong for someone to say appointing a Khaleefah is Fard kifayah so let some people do it and we will be saved. This will not save that person on the Day of judgment because the Fard has not been accomplished and hence the obligation remains on every single neck. The Ummah has only three days and two nights to choose a Khaleefah, if they fail to do this after this time the obligation continues on all and those who undertake the Fard are saved from the sin. But those who neglect will be sinful for not fulfilling their Lord's command and they will have to explain themselves to Him on the Day when His Account (Hisab) is swift.

حزب التحرير سوريا : " بشار يستهل شهر رمضان الفضيل بنحر شعبه: حماة تذبح من جديد

بعد شهر من الحصار المفروض على مدينة حماة التي شهدت أكبر الاحتجاجات الشعبية المطالبة بإسقاط نظام بشار أسد، اقتحمت دبابات الجيش السوري فجر الأحد 31-7-2011م مدينة حماة من أربعة محاور وسط إطلاق نار كثيف وقذائف أعادت إلى الأذهان مجازر حافظ أسد وأخيه رفعت، وها هو ابنه وريثه يسلك طريق الإجرام ذاته، وكأنه كُتب على حماة الأبيّة أن تلتاع بإجرام هذه الطغمة الحاكمة إلى أن يأذن الله بفجر جديد فيه الخير كله.

فقد بلغ عدد من سقط في حماة وحدها حتى وقت كتابة هذا البيان ما يقارب 113 شهيداً وأعداداً هائلة من الجرحى لم تَعُدْ المستشفيات قادرةً على استيعابها والتي طوقها الأمن كمستشفى بدر والحوراني والحكمة. علماً أن غالبية الشهداء سقطوا بإصابات في الرأس من بنادق القناصة الذين تمركزوا فوق أسطح مبنى شركة الكهرباء والسجن الرئيسي بالمدينة، فتحولت المدينة إلى ساحة حرب، ليس في تل أبيب مع يهود، وإنما في حماة لذبح شعب حر آذته جرائم النظام على امتداد أربعة عقود فصدع بالحق دون أن يخشى في الله لومة لائم، وطالب بإسقاط النظام بعد أن كان أكثر ما يطالب به هو إسقاط المحافظ أو عاطف نجيب أو ماهر أسد. ولم تقتصر حرب هذا النظام على شعبه في حماة وحدها، فقد أعلنها حرباً متنقلة على كافة المدن السورية، فقتل في دير الزور من قتل بعد قصف الدبابات لحي الجورة غرب دير الزور ليبلغ العدد الإجمالي لمن سقط على أيدي النظام في هذا اليوم ما يقارب 145، ولم تسلم طفلة من بلدة الحراك في درعا من إجرام هذا النظام، صورة تقتلع الأفئدة من مكانها إلا أنها لا تحرك صمتاً أخرق للجامعة العربية والمجتمع الدولي اللذين يعطيان لبشار الفرصة تلو الفرصة ليقتل شعبه بدم بارد بدعوى ملاحقة الجماعات المسلحة التي "تروع الأهالي وتنشر التخريب والفوضى"!!

يأتي بطش النظام هذا بعد أن فقد، أو يكاد، كل أوراقه لتثبيت حكمه الآيل للسقوط، فقد حاول أن يلعب بورقة الصراع الطائفي وتأليب طوائف على طوائف مع تسليحها كما فعل في حمص وتلكلخ وقطنا والزبداني، وحاول جاهداً أن يستجرّ الناس للعنف ليحظى بمبرر آخر لقتل شعبه، وما حادثة القطار وتفجير أنبوب النفط إلا من هذا الباب، إذ  كيف لهذا أن يحدث دون أن يكون تحت سمع النظام وبصره بل بتخطيطه وتدبيره وتأييده!! وكأنه بهذا ينفذ أجندة أمريكية - (إسرائيلية) في تقسيم سوريا.

لقد شرع بشار وزبانيته بما سيفتح عليهم أبواب الهلاك بإذن الله، ولئن كان حسم أمره بإشعال الفتنة الطائفية لخدمة أسياده وإنقاذ كرسيه، إلّا أنه نسي أو تناسى أن الشارع السوري في حالة غليان يتّقد للإطاحة بحكم طاغية لن تنقذه جهود صحبه.

وأمام هذا الحال فإننا نجد أنفسنا أمام أكثر من نداء مشفق:    

إلى أهالينا في سوريا:

إننا نحذركم من أن تسقطوا ضحية الفخاخ التي يرسمها لكم النظام وعلى رأسها نهج العنف المسلح ونربأ بكم أن تسلكوه، بل استمروا في إعلان رفضكم له بطريقة سلمية واصبروا على أذاه، فتلك كانت طريقة رسولكم الكريم صلى الله عليه وسلم حيث كان يقول لآل ياسر: صبرًا آل ياسر... ويعدهم بالجنة والفرج. وإياكم والمطالبات الأخرى من ديمقراطية أو دولة مدنية فإنها تحبط عملكم في دنياكم وآخرتكم. كما نقول لكم إن خروجكم يجب أن يكون لله وحده، ومن أجل تحكيم شرع الله وحده، ونسأل الله أن يكون قريباً.

إلى المخلصين من الضباط والجنود الذين ما زالوا يأتمرون بأمر النظام:

 لمَ تصمتون على جرائم سفاح لا يخاف الله في المسلمين، بل هو أبعد ما يكون خوفاً من الله وأقرب ما يكون إجراماً بحق عباده؟!

لمَ تسكتون على ذبح النساء والأطفال والولدان وهم إخوة وأبناء لكم، وأنتم تملكون القوة والمنعة لتوجيه الأمور نحو مسارها الصحيح من حماية لأهلكم وتطبيق لشرع ربكم؟!

إلى متى تخضعون للذين يطبقون أحكام الكفر علينا ويتركون شرع الرحمن، ويحاربون ويشردون ويسجنون كل من يدعو إليه؟!

أيرضيكم أن يستأسد أمن النظام وشبِّيحته عليكم فيقتلون أهلنا هنا وهم أهلكم، ويقتلون أهلكم هناك وهم أهلنا؟! إن هذا النظام هو أخسُّ من أن يسكت عنه.

ألم تَغْلِ الدماء في عروقكم وأنتم ترون دماء الأبرياء تسفك وأعراض الحرائر تهتك وجثث الأطفال جامدة في بياض كفنها كأنها تستصرخكم: أليس فيكم أنصار لله ولدينه ولنا نحن المسلمين المستضعفين؟!

لماذا يجبن هذا النظام الخائن لقضايا شعبه بحق الرد على يهود الذين يمعنون في احتلال الجولان منذ عام 1967م ويمعنون في إذلاله في حين هو أسرع ما يكون في الرد على شعبه بالقصف بالدبابات والمروحيات واستعمالكم أيها الضباط والجنود أداة لإجرامه، فأطيعوا الله في هذا النظام بتغييره ولا تمكّنوه من أن يورّطكم في دماء المسلمين.

أيها الضباط والجنود الغيارى المخلصون:

إن الحل بأيديكم فلا تضيعوه، والعيون ترنو إليكم فلا تخذلوها، فأنتم لذلك أهل ونعم الأهل... إننا نناديكم وننادي فيكم نخوة سعد بن معاذ وصحبه الأنصار الذين ملكوا عز الدارين بإذن الله... أما آن الأوان لأن تُروا الله من أنفسكم خيراً لتظفروا بما ظفروا به؟!... أما آن لكم أن تخلّصوا أهلكم من شرّ هذا النظام الجاثم على صدورهم وصدوركم منذ عقود؟! بلى لقد آن ... لقد آن.

اللهم نسألك في هذا الشهر الكريم، بأنك أنت الله الواحد الأحد الفرد الصمد الذي لم يلد ولم يولد ولم يكن له كفوًا أحد، أن تفرج كربنا وترحم ضعفنا وتنتقم لنا، وأن تجعل هذا الشهر الفضيل شهر فرج ونصر للمسلمين في سوريا وفي كل مكان.

اللهم إن لم ترحمنا فمن يرحمنا، وإن لم تنصرنا فمن ينصرنا؟

اللهم أكرمنا بأهل قوة ومنعة تمكننا من رقاب من آذى عبادك وعطل تطبيق شريعتك... اللهم أنصارًا كأنصار رسول الله، قال تعالى: (إِنَّا لَنَنصُرُ رُسُلَنَا وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَيَوْمَ يَقُومُ الْأَشْهَادُ).

اللهم إنك نعم المولى ونعم المجيب، وآخر دعوانا أن الحمد لله رب العالمين.

المكتب الإعلامي لحزب التحرير

ولاية سوريا

http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.info/info/index.php/contents/entry_14089

Quran is the main tool to bring Change.

by Anush Nigar Shamsi

 

The month of Ramadhan [is that] in which was revealed the Qur’an, a Guidance for the people(mankind) & clear proofs of Guidance & Criterion.
We hear recitation of the glorious Qur’an every night in our masaajid this month & Muslims will recite the Qur’an as much as we can. The question is, are we taking this Qur’an as a Huda and Furqaan in our Ummah’s affairs?
The sad truth is that we have not. For decades now, laws and rules that are not from Islam have governed our countries.
Rulers who are the most corrupt of men in the Ummah have run our countries. They have ruled us by laws based on secularism (kufr)
Our political systems have been dominated by dictators who have unilaterally made oppressive laws.
Similarly so called democrats who have collectively made laws in parliament to suit their interests and benefits.
In all cases we have seen a political system ravaged by corruption, nepotism, cronyism and slavery to western powers. Our economies have been enslaved to the capitalist states that have treated our counties simply as ‘markets’. The rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer. Poverty, lack of decent public services, mass unemployment & no industrialization is the legacy of decades of economic mismanagement, despite, Muslims being blessed with dedicated human resources, vast agricultural lands & huge reserves of natural gas, oil, coal & minerals. This situation has occurred after the Qur’an was removed from our public life and just left to guide us in our salat and fasting (personal matters), Whilst the Qur’an is recited in our masaajid, our political, economic & social lives has been led by manmade laws and capitalism. As an Ummah we have been aimlessly running from one western policy to another, from one institution to another, We need to look to the Islamic system to solve our problems, which is consistent with our beliefs, culture, history and heritage.
“Do you, then, believe in one part of the Book and reject the other?” (TMQ Surah Baqarah: 85)
“And We have revealed to you the Book explaining all matters” (TMQ Surah An-Nahl: 89)
“And rule them by what Allah has revealed and follow not their desires away from the Truth that has come to you” ( Surah Maidah: 48)
These ayaat clearly illustrate that this Qur’an came to address all of our affairs. it has been relegation of Qur’an to individual acts & neglect of societal rules which has led this Ummah to this state of affairs. Have the decades of implementing man-made western laws and systems brought any goodness to our Ummah?
It cannot be right that we worship Allah in our fasting & salah yet take Shaytan & his allies to lead us in the rest of our affairs!
As we fast this month, ummah is crying desperately for real change. This change will not come unless we take Qur’an as our guidance

Reply Ahmad Qureshi's allegation on Hizb ut Tahrir by some brothers.

Ahmed Quraishi
I have spent a long 10 years [1992-2002] covering Middle East politics on the ground in places like Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, among others. I have no doubt in my mind that Hizb al Tahrir is heavily infiltrated by British intelligence. In fact, in recent years, I have stumbled on more evidence that strengthens my personal belief in this. The Brits are using this group to the hilt. It's a strategic asset for them, nurtured and protected by them, and it is unfortunate that so many good intentioned British Muslims and others, including Pakistanis, and all of them young and impressionable, are attracted to this British organization. Several Mideastern countries caught irrefutable evidences linking Brit spies to this group. During the 1990s, there were some very harsh diplomatic confrontations between Saudi and British diplomats over this issue. The Saudis lashed out at the Brits and accused them of meddling in the region thru proxies in groups such as Hizb al Tahrir. One very senior Saudi prince went to the extent of accusing British intelligence of supporting extremism for strategic purposes. All this reasoning about Hizb al Tahrir growing in Central Asia and Indonesia is eyewash. This is a British organization and is fully supported by the British security establishment to penetrate Central Asia. I don't know anything about Indonesia so I will not comment on that part. Everyone is free to reach their conclusions but this is my studied opinion on this subject. I will advice young Muslim kids to be very alert and discerning about who is using you and for what purpose. Don't ever fall for poisoned honey. It's still sweet. But it's poison nonetheless.

Tariq Ahmed 
I am not a spokesperson for Hizb ut Tahrir or anybody, but i follow the news, and believe muslims should break the shackles of the west, and restore Khilafah.

The British and US have no need to infiltrate pakistan, they already run it. We can all see how western policy has been persued by Musharaff and now more recently by others.
3000 western cia agents are allowed in...isnt that blatant infiltration ? isnt that a security issue ? contrast that with the order to purge Islamic ideas that may have "infiltrated" into the military. Strange, why would the west want islamic state ? they dont, and AQ argument is flawed see my next post.
Similarly the pro-US puppets in the military, the government, media , and business...
THESE ARE THE PLACES THE WEST HAS REALLY INFILTRATED, so its a diversion to focus on 1 or 2 sincere muslims in military that may hold pro-Islamic views on the ruling system of Islam - Khilafah.
This proves an order from the US has come to purge Islamists, or else.
This is the real topsy turvey agenda, and i am suprised at the military, the US intervention seems utterley complete.

Also let us look at the policy of Hizb ut Tahrir, they are working to restore Islamic Khilafah, so how does that serve the british interest ? it doesnt, and that is why the uk government would love to ban that. It seems Pakistan is doing that for them.

Tariq Ahmed 

Now AQ argument is flawed on several points.
1. Actually Hizb ut Tahrir is not a foreign / british group as alleged- it IS a global pan-islamic group , and has pakistan wilayah as well. Also many expat pakistanis support it. So it is very strange for AQ to push this wrong assertion so far as he has.
2. HT does not seek mutiny, it only seeks consenus.

3. AQ argued that british mi6 has ordered infiltrated HT into the pakmil , so that they can leverage anti-nuke policy against pakistan. If mi6 infiltrated them at the peripehery, that was only to check out if HT was a non-violent political party. It found out that indeed this is the case, and reported it so.

So if the above facts are true, how could the british/ us now lever a false nuke security claim against pakistans military ?

To purge Islamists using this excuse is an indication that it is the military that is infiltrated by the USUK, and it is the military that is being manipulated by the usuk media into doing the 'dirty work' for them
4. previously AQ has mentioned that eg, OBL was assisted 'inside job' by pro-us faction in military, otherwise the us could not have evaded detection, someone helped them switch off the radar etc. So i would say to this, does that not concern him ? Does this not warrant arrest of those usuk agents ? isnt that a plot ?


Ahmed Quraishi 
Dear Tariq,

Please stop distorting what I write. I never wrote anywhere that MI6 is using this British group Hiz al Tahrir to 'leverage anti-nuke policy', whatever that means.

You can't properly quote what I have written and are misquoting. The rest of your points are an emotional defense of HT. Brother, you are free to be a member of HT or support it. I as a very responsible person am telling you that HT is a British group heavily infiltrated by British intelligence. Most of the impressionable young British Muslims from various backgrounds, including Pakistanis, are honest people and don't know this fact. HT is is infiltrated by the Brits that Prince Turki al-Faisal, the son of Shah Faisal of Saudi Arabia and the former head of Saudi intelligence, accused the Brits of using the group for espionage in Central Asia. Pakistani intelligence also has evidences from several occasions that shows that this group, HT, has MI6 agents in its ranks.


Ahmed Quraishi 
Anyway, I don't dispute your right to be impressed by this British group or follow it. I stand by my very considered opinion. Thanks.

Tariq Ahmed 

It is crystal clear Brig Ali is a senior military figure - He was passed over for promotion because of his warning alerts against musharaf pro-US policy, he has been consistent in raising views INSIDE the pakmil against the 'pro-us' policies over the years. He was right to do that, he did it in th right way, but We ignored him, and look at the mess that has got us into. OBL, PNS base, drones, raymond davies, Dr Afia....we are at war with US in all but name.
Brig Ali Khan voiced the loyal pakistan/islamic concerns, so for Kayani to get him, is wrong, that act could be interpreted as an anti-pak, pro-us purge.

Re HTB, it could well be the case that british used them for spying purpose, i dont deny that...just like any highly active group, they could be utilised and harnessed by a secret agenda. If it has mi6 agents in its ranks why dont you expose them ? and in anycase, these alleged agents cannot divert the HT agenda so easily...when some of them tried they were expelled. HT is sincere Islamic group and you know it, for this reason they are bound to be targetted. What you have done is however present the whole thing as if HT is riddled with spies to such an extent to make it an enemy of pakistan ....when it is no such thing. You should not have put on this false impresion.

How would you like it if i claimed youre group has been compromised by cia / Indian agents, and Kayani was influenced by us interests etc ? Its very loose talk, that should be qualified.
In fact you yourself have said many a time pakistan is riddled with these foreign agents and agenda, and that we have to overcome them. So howcome you dismiss HT for that, and dont dismiss goverment ? why not do a coup then ?


Tariq Ahmed 
Dear Ahmed, what do you say about the crackdown and kidnapping of HT brothers ?

I read this in gulf times http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=443066&version=1&template_id=41&parent_​id=23

" professionals like engineers, doctors and educated youth, had been distributing leaflets, brochures and pasting stickers in public places calling for action over the past month.
The Hizb also launched a similar campaign when the US called for a full-scale military assault on North Waziristan, urging the people to resist. The Hizb-ul-Tahrir kept in touch with media outlets via SMS on the terrorist attack on the PNS Mehran in Karachi, accusing the US of masterminding the attack. It regularly issued press releases urging people to “topple the government (and clear it) of traitors, conspirators and the American agents”.
Ahmed Quraishi 
I've heard or seen no such campaign, and I do have extensive contacts with likeminded young Pakistanis across the country. The only people who've been doing this are the Hizb Tahrir people. It's also strange that after the military showed concern about this British group trying to penetrate Pakistani military, the western media, and especially the Am-Brit media, is suddenly promoting this group and giving it more newspaper space and airtime.

Ahmed Quraishi 
[THIS IS A COMMENT I POSTED SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THIS SAME TOPIC ON 11 JULY 2011]

The Hizb Tahrir may attract many innocent Muslim kids from various countries, including Pakistan.

But the fact remains that this is a British group that has nothing to do with the original Hizb al Tahrir created by a Palestinian professor in the early 20th century.

The current group was created in the UK sometime in late eighties and early nineties. It is heavily penetrated by British intelligence operatives who have been using the mostly British kids in this group [from various backgrounds; Arabs, Pakistanis, Africans, etc.] to meddle in Central Asia and more recently in Pakistan.

Arab countries are tougher than us when it comes to controlling things. They discovered many hard evidences of British MI6 operatives inside Hizb Tahrir. In fact, a former head of Saudi intelligence, who was the eldest son of King Faisal, confronted the British of this hard evidence. At one point Riyadh even threatened to cut off diplomatic relations with UK if MI6 didn't stop using young British Muslim kids to penetrate Saudi Arabia.

Pakistani intelligence also discovered this link a few years back when several young British-Pakistanis who claimed to belong to Islamic groups were found to be MI6 agents.

So, the question of this British group, Hizb al Tahrir, trying to penetrate Pakistani military, is very disturbing. It's important to note that whatever this group has been doing so far has not been very successful in Pakistan. It has had limited success and I doubt it really managed to 'penetrate' Pakistani military. Maybe a couple of midlevel officers here and there but nothing more.

Also, as country and a nation, we have every right to be suspicious of any and every foreign-based group that comes to us in the name of Islam. These foreign groups, like Hizb al Tahrir or Al-Qaeda or whatever, are outside of our watch and we can't be sure who they represent and how much their own internal security is compromised.

Malik Subhani 

Ahmad Bhai : Thanks for providing such great information. I think we should be alert and continue watching them carfully. These guys are under the confirmed state of mind that they are the only ones on true Path and others who ever oppose them are in Kufer/Munafqat/Gumrahi and they misguiding most of the youth with their false interpretation of Quran wa Sunnah. would you please check the basic believes of their Founder by the link i am providing here,
http://www.alsunna.org/The-uprising-of-Hizb-at-Tahrir-Extremists.html
..........


Ahmad Imran 

We can come back to fiqh and fiqr later , but can someone give us tangible links of HuT to MI5/6 the Brits etc ....saying so doesnt make it so !
I want rational tangible links ....names, events, dates !
The HuT decry on the other hand that the Brits have falsely tried to implicae them by sending people under cover , but regardless , they maybe part of Grand British Tactic ( well who hasnt been in Pakistan...the Bhuttos ( British Trotskiyites), etc !

Tariq Ahmed 
re Malik Subhani ilong text...Hatred and effort against muslim Ummah and HT has long existed often exploiting ignorance, misinformation etc. I was eager to answer the first few alleged HT "strayings" because even i could easily do that...but then i quickly realised the insincere fake intelectuall argument was riddled all the way through, and frankly one of them really made me angry...and so it does not deserve any credible attention....To me its a sign that the enemies of Islam sense an Islamic awakening.

Malik Subhani 
Bro Tariq saheb ; I picked this Artical from www.alsunna.org and i hope that you must have something to say/reply to this because differentiating with the believes of ahle sunna would result otherway......there could be doubts, differences on the mathodology but differences in basic believes would never be tolarated by the majority of Muslims Ummah....I am surprised and by the refferences of Sheik's described believes in his written book more then anyother issues related to HT which also make me curiouse alot...

Tariq Ahmed 
Dear Ahmed bhai, you are wrong to claim the western media is giving HT attention, i really know for a fact they never give HT airtime that reflects the support in the community, or to present their ideas... in fact quite the reverse. But they do always portray them negatively as "extremists", wheeling out westernised secular "muslim" extremists to help bash Islam / HT....no real Islamic group has done that, only the westernised agents have. The west have tried to fit them up with false allegations many times...but they failed as there is no truth in that.

In anycase your false allegation of uk spying via HT, only assists the western anti-islamic agenda. Maybe this was an excuse with which to demonise HT brothers ?
Dont you think you already have enough open spies in the Zardari agent regime, and in the pro--us military ? kidnapping and making them illegal would make more sense wouldnt it ?

HT only calls for Islam, and Islamic Ruling...In fact its your allegation that assists the western global capitalist enslavement, as they will do anything to prevent Islamic Rule

You also imply the alleged western media is linked with them somehow..so give us the link that "promotes" HT agenda ... ? give us this proof of yours please ?

Ahmad Imran 
gentlemen ....am still waiting for tangible "evidence" of HuT links to UK !

Tariq Ahmed 

oh yes, and another thing - Ahmed bhai and his helpers thought i was an Indian spy -
how paranoid and insecure is that... !
just because i did not agree that terror state India was so stupid with a"a brain of a mouse". That was just shallow diversion to me. But i didnt know Ahmed bhai was a first line spinner then, i was merely making a real discussion. It seems everytime anyone discusses pakistan trying to improve it, Ahmed bhai has to divert the issue and let the people vent against India, claiming everything is hunky dory, when it is clear as daylight the terrorist indians had protectionist policy whilst paklistan had a for sale sign @ 10% policy. I reckon they publically diss the US, but private;y deal with them
This system of Ahmed bhai fits in neatly with blaming HT as britsh doesnt it...?..frankly i dont think many people will believe this excuse for the crackdown. I reckon its an order from US to get rid of Islamists before US will pay up, otherwise they will replace their front men.
I do hope those HT brothers are being treated well, and released soon, i hope Ahmed bhai would at least do all he could to assist.
Wasalaam to you AQ brother...no harm intended.


Malik Subhani 
Tariq Bhai : I am not divertting my Question if then you too dont divert your answers for me.....tell me about HIZB founders Book and qouted unaccepted believes of Shiekh AnNibahani regarding who is the creator of right or wrong ACT. Waiting

Tariq Ahmed 

I have read about the abduction of HT deputy spokesperson Imran Yousafzai on their website. presumably by the isi/pakmil under orders from usa....?
This raises a two or three questions -
1. why abduct an innocent HT young man who is only calling for Islamic law ?
2. why release raymond davis who killed muslims ?

Ahmed bhai has been quiet on this, so iwill ask him directly ...
3 Does he approve of this abduction of Imran Yousafzai or not... YES or NO ?

Ahmad Imran 
am telling you ....ISI is the fifth column of Pak governence ...plain and simple. Maybe not the entire org. but a strategic vital component of it ....and they rule Pakistan for teh vested interests of foreign powers ! Hail the ISI ....never question them ....never ...just so the debauched system can continue !

Tariq Ahmed 
I am still waiting for a an answer YES or NO, as i read that another HT member was abducted -- Is this a deafening silence speaking Volumes ?

Ahmad Imran 
Secualar nationalists ?? eh ? anyone ??:-)

Abu Yousef 
Dear Malik Subhani,

You have mentioned quite a few straying for HT, and it would be hard to tackle all of them at the same time. Insha allah I would like to come to each of them one by one so can get a better understanding. The first straying you have mentioned is in regards actions and as to the creation of the actions and if a person is comitting these actions on his own behalf or by the will of Allah.

I will refer to the first book Nizam...which explains in detail regarding this concept. As you will read below the puropse was to clarify the misconception regarding this in terms to Qadaa and Qadar.

Below I have provided the text from the book, to clarify your first misconception.

Al-QaDaa wal Qadar

In surat at-Tauba, He _ says:
"Say: Nothing will happen to us except what Allah has decreed for us. He is our Protector and in Allah, let the believers place their trust." [At-Tauba: 51]
In surat Sabaa, He _ says:
"From Whom is not hidden the least little atom in the heavens or on earth, nor is there anything less than that, or greater, but it is in the Clear Record." [Saba: 3]
In surat al-Anaam, He _ says:
"He it is Who gathers you at night and knows that which you commit by day. Then He raises you again to life, that the term appointed (for you) may be fulfilled. And afterward unto Him is your
return and He will show you the truth of all that you did." [Al-An’am: 60]
In surat an-Nisa, He _ says:
"If some good befalls them, they say: This is from Allah. But if evil, they say: This is from you (OProphet). Say: All things are from Allah. But what has come to these people, that they fail to understand a single fact?" [An-Nisa: 78]
These ayat of the Qur'an, and other ayat similar in meaning, are used by many as evidences in the question of QaDaa and Qadar. They take the understanding from these that man is compelled to undertake actions; man undertakes his actions under compulsion through the decree and will of Allah; and that Allah, created man and his actions. They try to support their opinion by the saying of Allah:
"But Allah has created you and your handiwork!" [As-Saffat: 96]
They also support their point with the hadeeth of the Prophet _, such as:
"The Holy Spirit inspired in my soul that nobody will pass away until they receive in full their livelihood, term of life (ajal), and what is decreed for them."
The question of QaDaa and Qadar has occupied a great deal of discussion amongst the Islamic schools of thought. Ahlus Sunnah held the opinion which in summary is man has Kasb Ikhtiari (free will) in carrying out his actions, so he is accounted because of this Kasb Ikhtiari. Al-Mu'tazilah were of the opinion that man is the one who creates his actions and so he is accounted on them because it is he who initiated them.
Al-Jabriyah held the opinion that Allah, is the one who creates man and his actions, therefore man is compelled to carry out his actions and does not have free will, so he is like the feather which floats in the air according to where the wind carries it.
If one was to come to an accurate understanding of the subject of al-QaDaa wal Qadar he must first have an understanding of the correct basis upon which the argument is built. This basis should not be whether the actions of man are created by himself or by Allah. It is also not the knowledge of Allah (ilmullah), in terms of the fact that He knows that man will perform such an action and that His knowledge encompasses it. Nor is it the decree of Allah (iraadatullah) in terms that His decree was related to the servant's action, i.e., that the action must happen because of this will. It also shouldn't be that the servant's action is recorded in the Al Lauh Al MahfooTH (Protected Decree or Register), so as a result he is inevitably going to carry out this action in accordance with what is recorded.
Indeed, the basis upon which the subject is built is neither of these matters, since they have no relationship to the subject in terms of reward and punishment. They are rather related to the subject in terms of creation, the knowledge that encompasses everything and the will of the Creator, which is related to all the possible matters, and the inclusion in Al Lauh Al MahfooTH of everything. This relationship is detached from the subject of reward and punishment for the action. In other words, is man compelled to perform an action, good or bad, or does he have a choice? And does man have the choice to perform an action or abandon it? Or does he not have the choice?
Any individual who studies the actions of man accurately will observe that man lives within two spheres: one of them he dominates, which is the sphere that falls within the domain of his free will and within it, his actions, which he carries out by his own free will occur. The other sphere dominates him and it is the sphere within whose domain he lives and within it the actions, which he has no free will in, occur; whether they occur from him or not.
In regards to the actions that fall within the sphere that dominates man, man has nothing to do with them or in their existence. They can be divided into two types: A type which is required by the law of the universe (wujood), and a type within which actions that are beyond man's control, but are not within the law of the universe (wujood). As far as the actions, which are within the laws of the universe (wujood), man is in complete submission to them. Therefore, he is forced to proceed in accordance with them because he proceeds with the universe and life subject to a particular law that does not change. Subsequently, man's actions in this sphere occur without his will and he is compelled and has no choice. Man came to this life without his will and he shall leave it without his will. He cannot fly in the air with his body only, walk in his natural being on water, nor create the colour of his eyes. Man did not produce shape of his head nor the size of his body. Indeed, it was Allah Who created all of this without the created servant having any say in that. This is because Allah created the law of the universe (wujood), made it the regulator of the universe, and made the universe proceed in accordance to it, without being able to function differently.
As for the actions, which are beyond man's control, which he is unable to avoid and they are not within the laws of the universe, they are the actions which man initiates, or they fall on him against his will without him ever being able to avoid them.
Examples of such actions are, if someone on a wall accidentally falls on a person and thus kills that person; or if someone shoots at a bird and the shot hits a person he was not aware of and kills him; or if a car goes off the road or a train derails, or a plane crashes. All of these are due to, an unexpected failure without any ability on the part of the pilot or the driver to avoid the accident, thus causing the death of the passengers. All of these examples of actions and the like which occurred from man or fell on him, are not within the law of the universe, yet they occurred from man or on him without his will and it was beyond his ability to control them. All of these actions, which occur within the sphere that dominates man, are termed QaDaa, because Allah alone is the one who has predetermined them. Therefore, man is not reckoned about these actions, whether they are classified as beneficial, or harmful, or whether he liked or disliked them - though Allah alone knows the good and bad in these actions - because man has no influence on them. He has no information about them or the manner in which they came about; nor is he able to drive them away or avoid them at all. Man thus must believe in this QaDaa and that this QaDaa is from Allah.
As for Qadar, it is evident that the actions, which occur either in the sphere that dominates man or in the sphere that man dominates, occur involving objects in the universe, man and life. Allah created certain attributes in these objects. For example, He created in fire the attribute of burning, in wood the attribute of catching fire, and in the blade the attribute of cutting. He made the attributes indispensable in objects according to the law of the universe such that they do not change. When it appears that an attribute changes, it means Allah has eliminated the attribute of that object and such an event would be unnatural. These are miracles that happen to the Prophets. As Allah created attributes in the objects, He created in man instincts and organic needs. He created in the instincts and organic needs specific attributes. Hence, He created in the instinct of reproduction the attribute of sexual inclination. He created in the organic needs attributes such as hunger and thirst and the like. He made these attributes inseparable from them according to the law of the universe. These particular attributes that Allah has created in objects, instincts and organic needs are called al-Qadar. This is because Allah alone created the objects, instincts, and organic needs and predetermined (Qaddara) in them their attributes. These attributes are not brought about by the objects nor does man have anything to do with them nor an influence on their existence. Therefore, man must have iman that it is Allah who has predetermined these attributes in objects. However, these attributes have the capacity for man to perform by means of utilising them an action either according to the commands of Allah and thus it is good, or contradicting His commands and thus it is bad. So when performing actions utilising objects with their attributes or in responding to the instincts and organic needs, if (these actions) were according to the commands and prohibitions of Allah they would be termed good actions, and would be termed bad actions if they were in disagreement to the commands and prohibitions of Allah.
Accordingly, all actions - good or bad - that occur within the sphere that dominates man are from Allah. All the attributes of objects and in the instincts and organic needs - whether resulting in good or bad - are also from Allah. Consequently, a Muslim must believe that QaDaa - good or bad - is from Allah, i.e. he should believe that actions beyond his sphere of influence are from Allah. He must also believe that Qadar - good or bad - is from Allah i.e. he must believe that the innate attributes of the objects are from Allah, whether they result in good or bad, and man, the created has no effect on them. Thus man's lifespan (ajal), provision (rizq), and soul (ruH) are all from Allah On the same token, the sexual inclination, and inclination towards ownership existing in the instincts of reproduction and survival, together with thirst and hunger, existing in the organic needs, are all from Allah.
This is in respect to the actions that occur within the sphere that dominates man and the attributes of all objects. As for the sphere that man dominates, it is the sphere in which he proceeds freely according to the system he chooses, whether it is the law of Allah (Shari’ah) or any other. This is the sphere in which the actions that emanate from man or fall upon him, occur with his free will. For example, he walks, eats, drinks and travels, whenever he likes. Likewise, he refrains from doing any of these actions whenever he likes. He also burns with fire and cuts with a knife when he chooses. He satisfies the instincts of reproduction and ownership and hunger of his stomach, as he likes. He freely performs that or abstains from it. Therefore, man is reckoned on these actions, which he performs within this sphere.
Though the attributes in objects, instincts, and organic needs, which Allah predetermined in them and also made them intrinsic have an affect on the outcome of the action, their attributes by themselves do not initiate action, it is man who initiates the action when using them. Hence, the sexual inclination in the instinct of reproduction has the potential for good and bad; and the hunger present in the organic need has the potential for good and bad. However, the one who performs actions that are good or bad is man and not the instinct or the organic need. This is because Allah created for man the mind that comprehends and He gave the mind the quality of comprehension and judgement. He also guided man to know the path of good and bad.
"And we showed him (the man) the two paths (of good and bad)." [Al-Balad: 10]
Allah also created in man the ability to comprehend vice and righteousness.
"And He inspired it as to its wrong (fujoor) and its right (taqwa)." [Ash-Shams: 8]
When man responds to his instincts and organic needs in a manner agreeing with the commands and prohibitions of Allah, then he performs the good action and proceeds in the path of righteousness. When he responds to the instincts and organic needs deviating from the commands and prohibitions of Allah, then he performs the bad action and proceeds in the path of vice. Therefore, in all of that, the good and bad emanate from man. He responds to the needs according to the commands and prohibitions of Allah and thus does good, or responds to them deviating from Allah's commands and prohibitions and thus does bad. Consequently man is reckoned on his actions, which occur in the sphere that he dominates, thus he is either rewarded or punished because he has undertaken those actions freely without any coercion. Although the attributes of the instincts and organic needs are from Allah, and their potential for good and bad is also from Allah, Allah didn't fashion the attribute in a manner that forces man to use it, whether in a way that pleases or displeases Allah i.e. in good or bad. Likewise the attribute of burning was not fashioned in a manner that compels man to burn anything, whether this pleases or displeases Allah i.e. in good or bad. Rather, these attributes are fashioned in the objects, instincts, and organic needs, in a way that they result in these attributes when anybody uses these matters (objects, instincts and organic needs) in the proper manner. When Allah created man with his instincts, organic needs, and the mind, He endowed him with the choice to carry out or abstain from an action. Allah did not compel him to carry out or to abstain from the action. Furthermore, He did not make the attributes of the objects, instincts and organic needs in a manner that compels man to carry out or abstain from an action. Man is therefore free, to perform or abstain from an action by the use of what He granted him of the distinguishing mind, and He made it the place of shar’ai responsibility. Accordingly, Allah will reward man for performing the good because his mind chose to perform actions according to the commands of Allah and abstain from His prohibitions. He would also punish him for performing the bad actions because his mind chose to disobey the commands of Allah and do what He prohibited by responding to his instincts and organic needs in a way contrary to the orders of Allah. Therefore, man's accountability is right and just, because he is free to carry out his action and is not compelled. In this question, the QaDaa and Qadar is irrelevant. It is rather to do with man carrying out his actions freely and therefore he is responsible for his actions.
Allah _, says:
"Every soul is a pledge for what it earned" [Al-Muddaththir: 38]
As for the knowledge of Allah (ilmullah), this does not force man to carry out an action. Allah knows that man is going to freely undertake an action. To carry out this action is not based on the knowledge of Allah, rather, the eternal knowledge of Allah means that He knows that man is going to carry out the action. With regards to "the writing in the Al-Lauh al-MahfooTH, it is an expression that the knowledge of Allah encompasses everything.
With regards to the will of Allah (iraadatullah), this does not compel man to carry out any action. Its meaning, however, is that nothing can take place in His Kingdom without His will, i.e. nothing takes place against His will. Thus, if man carried out an action and Allah did not prevent or compel him from doing so, and instead left him to act freely, without any compulsion, then man has acted by the will of Allah and not contrary to His will. Man's action was undertaken by himself and by his choice, and the will of Allah did not compel him to carry out the action.
This is the issue of al QaDaa wal Qadar which will drive man to do good and avoid bad when he realises that Allah is watching him and will account him (for his actions); and that He has endowed him with the choice to act or abstain; and if he does not choose the right actions, he will be severely reprimanded and punished.
Therefore, we find the true believer, who understands sincerely the concept of al QaDaa wal Qadar and who is fully acquainted with the mental faculties and choice that Allah has endowed him with, is very conscious in observing Allah's orders and being afraid of Him. He endeavours to comply with the commands of Allah and to abstain from the prohibitions, because of his fear of the punishment of Allah _, his desire to be in His Jannah, and his yearning in attaining that which is greater than all of this, namely the pleasure of Allah (RiDwan Allah).
Whenever the level of thinking declines, the patriotic bond (raabitah al wataniyyah) amongst people arises, due to them living in one land and being attached to it. The survival instinct drives them to defend themselves, the country they live in and the land they live off. Hence the patriotic bond arises. This patriotic bond is the weakest and lowest level of bonds. It is present amongst animals and birds as well as human beings. It manifests itself in an emotional way. It comes about in the event of a foreign aggression against the homeland, either when attacked or occupied. The patriotic bond has no effect when the homeland is safe from aggression. It ceases when the foreigner is repelled or banished from the homeland. Therefore, this bond is of a low level.
Moreover, when the thinking level is narrow, a nationalistic bond (raabitah qawmiyyah) arises. It is a family bond though in a broader sense. This is because when the survival instinct becomes deeply rooted in the individual, love of dominance appears in him.
This love of dominance is individualistic in the man of low intellect. However, as the awareness of an individual broadens his love of dominance widens, thus he considers the dominance of his family. Once his awareness has broadened and widened, he considers the dominance of his people in his homeland. Once this is achieved he considers their dominance over all other peoples. Therefore, due to this aspect local feuds arise amongst the members of the family. Hence, once the dominance within the family is settled then the feud transfers to a feud between his family and other

جفرا الأرض القاحلة 

Ahmed Quraishi wrote :
"This is a British organization and is fully supported by the British security"
"I have no doubt in my mind that Hizb al Tahrir is heavily infiltrated by British intelligence."
"Mideastern countries caught irrefutable evidences linking Brit spies to this group."
"I have spent a long 10 years [1992-2002] covering Middle East politics on the ground in places like Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, among others."

1- Is this a polical analysis or news or advice or what !
2- If they are a british organization why would they hire spies to watch them ? :)
3- Where is your advice to the people who are already with this group ?
to kick the spies that you know about out ? to start another organization since their goals seem to be honorable ?
4- Can we take the "irrefutable evidences " that stated without showing us anything from the puppet agent governments in the mideast as an advice or evidence or what?
5- If you follow 1 month and not 10 years of news you would know that this group you are attacking is more public and popular outside the countries you covered for. So your coverage about syria,lebanon,jordan doesn't qualify your article to be an analysis or news or advice.

جفرا الأرض القاحلة 

Malik Subhani,
Don't copy paste from AICP literature.
Bring one point at a time and we can discuss

Abu Yousef 
Ahmed Quraishi,

1. You mentioned that the British HT has nothing to do with the original HT.
Is there any official statement from the original HT that disassociated them selves from the British HT? Is there any change in work or ideology that makes one say that they have deviated from the original HT? On what basis is this assumption built??
2. You mentioned that it is heavily penetrated by British inteligence.
Is there any evidence for this claim? On the contrary David Cameron has been trying to ban HT in UK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1TzRBOoRhA
HT has been clear in its literature and in their ground work, regarding establishing Islam as a system on the foot steps of the Prophet (PBUH). Their ideas and concepts are in clear conflict with the western ideology. Their work is not promoting democracy or capitalism as an ideology. Through your research and study what actions of HT led you to believe that British or their foreign policies are benefiting from HT work? I think this question has been raised before on this threaded discussion to provide evidence linking them to British spies.
3. You mentioned Head of Saudi intelligence, who was the eldest son of King Faisal, confronted the British of this hard evidence. At one point Riyadh even threatened to cut off diplomatic relations with UK if MI6 didn't stop using young British Muslim kids to penetrate Saudi Arabia.
I don’t see any thing in this statement that points HT to be British agents. Even taking this statement as is, British Muslim kids penetrating Saudi Arabia don’t equate to HT members.

Currently HT is leading the charge in unifying the Ummah under one flag, and establishing a society that is built on Islamic sharia. You your self have admitted that Khilafah will come as it has been promised. Shouldn’t more care be taken in accusing them without providing hard facts, and effecting people’s mentality with negative perception?

Ahmed Quraishi 
Dear Abu Yousef,

Your argument is only intended at discrediting me. You are basically trying to defend this British group in an indirect way.

That's fine by me. But please do not pose questions which can be easily answered by looking at the history of this British group. Hizb al Tahrir as created by a Palestinian man who received his education at al-Azhar in early 20th century died long back. His group almost died with him, maintaining limited presence in Sharia schools in Palestine, Jordan and partially Lebanon.

The group created in the UK in the 1990s is something totally different. This is what I mean when I say the existing Hizb al Tahrir is a British group that has nothing to do with the one created by the Palestinian man some 70 years ago. The only similarity is the name and the fact that this British group is using the original group's literature.

I know that a majority of the members of the British Hizb al Tahrir are noble and sincere people and I do not automatically consider them to be British agents. Not at all.

All I am saying is that I personally, in all honesty and keeping the interests of Muslims foremost, can confidently say that this group is penetrated by British intelligence who are using it for their own purposes in specific places like some Central Asian republics and also in western China. And nowadays in Pakistan. As a Pakistani citizen, I cannot accept that a British group try to create a following inside Pakistani government and military in the name of Islam. That's not permissible at all.

Abu Yousef

Dear Ahmed,
My intention is not to discredit you. I have read some of your posts, and see that you are a concerned citizen who brings relevant topics to discussion in order to establish common consensus to unite the people and change the state of the country. However I do think that you view on HT is not objective, and I am not saying this to defend the group in an indirect way, nor to steer it into an argument. I think any opinion should be based on an intellectual rational and discussion.
My main objection is that your whole perspective of this group is built on the hypothesis that the group is British agent. However you have not provided the facts that establish their relations with the British Government and spy agency. It is a well known fact that they are strong in UK and work openly. But so is true of them in Australia and USA, and does not establish their connection to UK. Do you have any evidence that the current HT has deviated from the original call and method since its inception. Based on their literature or open leaf-lets what has changed that lead you to think that they are linked with Britain.
You mentioned not to pose questions that can be easily answered by looking at the history of the British group. HT have media offices and spokesperson in different countries and continents. Are you tying them all under the British HT leadership? And I am still unable to find any thing credible in their history, literature or on the web that reaches the same conclusion as yours.
This is what Former Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Mirza Aslam Beg had to say about HT….
The former COAS said the HT is purely a non-violent organization which neither forces its agenda nor plans to do so. “Their people want the implementation of Shariah through a convincing mechanism and their books, some of them I have read, are a research work.”
“I told their people, when I was in command and even after leaving the command, that their system of Shariah is possible to be implemented in Pakistan provided the Constitution of Pakistan, based on Quran and Sunnah, and it (their system) has coherence.”
http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=54070&Cat=2&dt=6%2F23%2F2011

Although as I mentioned, any one who has read their literature will objectively come to conclusion that their goals are completely contrary to British foreign policy. But to provide further evidence so as to prove that I am not trying to promote HT but to clear the facts; I am listing analysis from western think tanks that assume Hizb to be a threat and have studied them and other International News Media. They still don’t draw the same conclusion as you have.
•Below is the research by Heritage Foundation: Hizb ut-Tahrir: An Emerging Threat to U.S. Interests in Central Asia
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2003/05/Hizb-ut-Tahrir-An-Emerging-Threat-to-US-Interests-in-Cen​tral-Asia
•This is an analysis by GlobalSecurity.org : Hizb ut-Tahrir al-Islami (Islamic Party of Liberation)
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/hizb-ut-tahrir.htm
•This was on CNN World: Arrest of Pakistani officer revives fears of extremism within military
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-06-22/world/pakistan.extremism_1_pakistani-army-pakistani-court-pakistani-of​ficer?_s=PM%3AWORLD
•This is on Jerusalem Post: Hizb Ut-Tahrir
http://www.jpost.com/topic/Hizb_ut-Tahrir

Hence as you mentioned…keeping interests of all Muslims, you will clarify your comments with credible evidence that HT is penetrated by British, and are being used? What is the objection that you have in their method and ideology? How is establishing an Islamic state in interest of Western Powers?

جفرا الأرض القاحلة

So we have 2 HTs ? one that "almost died" with the founder and one that was created by the british in the 90's ?
THat does not make sense for the following
1- The leadership in the hizb is from the pre 50's generation and not from the 90's generation :)
2- We do see different explanation of the literature between the pre 90 and 90s generation.If you talk with an 80's year old HT member is like talking with a 30 year old member
3- We do not see any change in the goal from the 50's till now.
4- We do not see any change in the methodology of this party from the 50's till now.

You mentioned that the british are using them in central asia, and china and oakistan for their interests. So Britain is creating an islamic group calling for a Caliphate so they can get the oil in central asia or kick the american's out from pakistan ?

Since you studied in UAE under Azhar and other Ulama s, don't you know that " Albayyenah 3la man 2dda3a" " The proof is upon the person who claims "
One person replied to you with links and artciles supporting his saying.
What is your proof for all your accusations?
If I say you are a british agent or spy, I have to bring the proof for my saying. Right ?