Dear Muslims:

Dear brothers and sisters in Islam, The question of Jerusalem still looms on the
horizon for the Muslim Ummah, yet some of us are becoming more and more
unmindful of that tiny spot of land that has always meant so much to the Ummah.

This is the land that Shaddaad ibn Aws (RAA) and `Ubaadah ibn as-Saamit
(RAA), both companions of the Prophet (SAW), are buried. This the land where
alKharaj (RAA), one of the trusted generals of `Umar ibn alKhattaab (RAA) is
buried. This is the Jerusalem which 70,000 martyrs are buried.

And who can forget the fact that this is the land where the great imaams, Shaikh
Ibn Qudaamah, Shaikh Abu `Umar, Shaikh Abu Muhammad alMaqdisi and
Imaam Salaah ud-Din alAyyubi (RHM) fought to liberate its' inhabitants and the
land from those wretched cross-worshipping Crusaders?

And who could say that they have seen a land like this where Ibn `Ataa, Imaam
ash-Shaafi`ii, Imaam Abu Haamid alGhazzaali and over 1,000 other imaams
(RHM) taught and were trained in the Shari`a.

This is the land that Shaikh ulIslam Badr ud-Din al`Aini and Amir ulMu'minin in
hadith Imaam Ibn Hajar al`Asqalaani (RHM) also visited and learned some
knowledge.

This city was the stage for the valiant struggle against the Jews conducted by
al`Allamah alAmin alHussaini, Imaam `Izz ud-Din and Shaikh alHalabi and many
others (RHM) who laid down their lives and faced persecution from the forces of
darkness.

It is where one of them, Shaikh alHajj alKhaalis, was jailed in Acre but to this day,
at 115 years old, proclaims boldly,

'We are the sons of the precious homeland. We have never let go of Jerusalem.
Honour is dear and must be protected with the sword.'

So what are we going to do about the travesty of justice that is facing Jerusalem?
Who can forget what Hanan Abu Sneinah, only five years old, said about
conditions there,

'The Jews beat me up every day on the way to school. They head and kick me.'

This is only a five year old girl. And her older sister also informs us,

'The Jews run behind us and surprise us by ripping off our khimaars (head covers)
from behind. We do not see them and they take us by surprise.'

The Abu Sneineh family is one of the most famous in the area, and look at the
humiliation that they have to suffer through in this regard. And there are so many
others that have been displaced and suffered in the land of Islam and the prophets.

Let us work together to change that evil and to work consistently and united and let
us come together to make a Jew-free Palestine and re-introduce the Shari`a courts
to bring back the shining justice of a land that had missed it for so long. Amin.

PERFECTING THE SALAAH;
What About The Nawaafil?

PART 1
There is now a dearth of material about preserving our five compulsory salawaat.
For those that this is a serious problem for, indeed the articles written for it are
necessary and they should be rebuked so that they should stay in the religion and
avoid the punishment of Allah.

But what of those who are preserving what is compulsory on them of the salaah
and they would like to do a little something more? Maybe they are unsure about
what to do to show their love towards Allah in the way of extra worship.

Therefore, it was seen to be beneficial in putting together this short article as a
framework for those who are interested and would like to do extra worship and get
even closer to Allah. Or it may be that they feel weak and would like to renew the
battery of imaan, which at times is in need of charging.

What has been collected is a list of the nawaafil that are recommended and
otherwise to the four schools of thought. Not only will we give the evidence on
them, but we will also quote the four schools of thought who will shed light on what
they think are the best in their estimation, insha'allah.

And for the one that is reading, it is hoped that he benefits so that he might come
one step closer to perfecting his imaan. And may Allah give us all the tawfiq
(success).

THE NAWAAFIL BEFORE FAJR

For the nawaawil before fajr, it is known that all of the schools of thought praise
and give high priority to this two raka'ah prayer before the fajr commences.

This is from the statement of the Messenger (SAW), 'The two raka'ah of fajr is
more beloved to me than the world and all that is in it,' related in the Jaami'
us-Sahih of Imaam Muslim and classifed as sahih.

The madhaahib also mention the desireable nature of reciting Surat ulKaafirun in the
first raka'ah and Surat ulIkhlaas in the second raka'ah, as it was known that the
Messenger (SAW) used to do this recommended action.

They also say that the two raka'ah should be light and very easy for the believer.
Thus the person should not make too much haste, but there should be some
swiftness, for it is known in a hadith from A'isha (RAA) that the Prophet (SAW)
was swift in offering his nawaafil before fajr.

SALAAT ULISHRAAQ, OR THE SALAAT UT-TASHRIQ OR SHURUQ

This prayer is an especially great delight to those of the Hanafi madhhab, and due
to his strictness on it, among the other voluntary salawaat,Imaam Abu Hanifa
(RAA) came to be known as 'The Peg.' This was due to his standing so long in the
prayer.

The Prophet (SAW) said,

'Whoever prays fajr in jama'ah, then he sits mentioning Allah until the sun has risen,
then he prays two raka'ah (this is the Ishraaq prayer), he has the reward of a Hajj
and an 'Umra, completely, completely, completely,' Collected by Imaam
at-Tirmidhi and classified as sahih.

We would like to make the note about this hadith however that the reward for this
salaah does not remove the obligation of doing the hajj. So the one that performs
this salaah should not think that he is now exempt from hajj, as this is not the
understanding of the hadith.

Besides this, the seeker of reward should wait patiently after fajr, until the sun has
risen and lost its' red colour and then after that make his Ishraaq prayer and seek
reward.

If this prayer has the reward of a hajj and an 'umra, then should it be the case that
we should miss this reward? Subhaanallah, may we capitalise on this reward!

THE SALAAT UD-DUHAA AND ITS' TIME

This prayer is what can be prayed after the rising of the sun two meters from the
ground all the way up until the time of Salaat uz-Zuhr.

It is what is called the prayer of those who turn to Allah frequently and is a prayer
that many scholars utilise. The Prophet (SAW) is known to have prayed it only
once, and that was before the conquest of Makkah.

The benefit of the prayer can be seen in the hadith narrated by Abu Dhar (RAA),
where the Messenger (SAW) said,

'Every joint of the body should do an act of sadaqah (charity), every glorification is
an act of charity, enjoining good and forbidding evil is also an act of charity and the
two raka'ah of Duhaa are equal to these,' collected by Imaam Muslim and
classified as sahih.

It was also mentioned by Abu Huraira (RAA) and Abu Dardaa (RAA) the
following,

'I was advised by my friend [the Prophet (SAW)] to preserve three, 1) fasting
three days out of each month, 2) two raka'ah of duhaa 3) and praying witr before I
go to sleep,' collected by Imaam Bukhaari (RH) and Imaam Muslim (RH) and
agreed upon as sahih.

It was in the house of one of his female relatives, Umm Haani (RAA) that she
reported that he prayed a total of eight raka'aat before he went to do the conquest
of Makkah. A'isha (RAA), although she did not prayer witr, was never known to
miss Salaat ud-Duhaa.

This shows the central role that this salaah had in some of the lives of the Sahaaba
(RAA). To pray Duhaa, one can pray a minimum of atleast two raka'ah, while at
the maximum they may pray eight raka'aat. And this is according to the Hanbali,
Maaliki and Shaafi'ii madhaahib.

However, the Hanafi madhhab would differ and pronounce that Duhaa can be at
the maximum 12 raka'aat. This is due to the hadith found in the collections of
Imaam Ibn Maajah (RH) and Imaam at-Tirmidhi (RH) which states that Anas
(RAA) heard the Prophet (SAW) say,

'Whoever prayed 12 raka'aat of Duhaa, then Allah will build for him a castle of
gold in the Paradise.'

But this hadith is a subject of dispute among the other madhaahib. But nonetheless
there is great reward in praying this salaah and indeed it is the salaah of the
righteous people, as our Messenger (SAW) said,

'Whoever preserves the even numbered duhaa, then his sins will be forgiven, even if
they were as much as the foam in the sea,' collected by Imaam at-Tirmidhi (RH)
and Imaam Ibn Maajah (RH) and classified as sound.

We should not underestimate the greatness of Salaat ud-Duhaa, for Allah even
made reference to it,

'By the Duhaa, by the night when it darkens,' Surat ud-Duhaa, ayaat 1-2.

And as is understood by the scholars of tafsir, anytime Allah swears by something,
this denotes its' magnitude, importance and greatness. Thus let us take heed and
take advantage of this time and benefit from it.

And may Allah give all of us the strength to seek out extra reward and praise Him
as He deserves. And may He (SWT), protect us from our own evil and purify us
through these deeds.

7 CONDITIONS OF SHAADA;
Introduction and Condition of Knowledge

The true and authentic word of Tawhid is the unified and perfected methodology
that shades and cools all of the lamentations of life. So whoever says it (La ilaha
illallah) with his tongue, with conviction of his heart and implementation of his limbs,
has entered with complete wholeness into the religion of Allah, Mighty and
Majestic.

Then what if after that he is not submitting to the judgement and rule of Allah in the
desires of his life?

Rather, he is merely turning to and utilising its' (Islam's) universal and perfect
worship in regards to other desires and wishes.

Then he is preferring for himself methodologies, ways, regimes and laws of what he
has organised his life by!!!

This is not a matter for one who says, La ilaha illallah and he knows the meaning of
it and its' judgement. It was said to alHasan alBasri (RH) that people were saying
that whoever says La ilaha illallah will enter Jannah. He replied,

'Whoever says La ilaha illallah and acts by its' reality and does what is compulsory
of it will enter the Jannah.'

It was also said to Wahb ibn alMunabbih (RAA), 'Isn't La ilaha illallah the key to
Jannah?' Wahb replied,

'Certainly, but there is not one key except that it has teeth. Then if you come with
the key and it has the right amount of teeth, it (the door to Jannah) will open for
you, but if you do not, it (the door to Jannah) will not open for you,' Taken from
Bukhaari in Kitaab alJanaa'iz.

And it is from the established rules of fiqh that the absolute and unrestricted
(mutlaq) are linked and correlated with the restricted (muqayyid) if the judgement
and the reason behind it is one.

Thus when there comes an absolute and unrestricted text, and there comes other
united, combined and consolidated texts with it in cause/reason and judgement,
then the absolute and unrestricted texts are linked and correlated with the restricted
and limited.

So all of the beautiful ahaadith that mention the bounty and virtue of Tawhid
(singling Allah out in His uniqueness) and make clear that the entrance into the
Jannah and the prohibition of the Fire depend upon the statement of sincerity and
tawhid, La ilaha illallah, these ahaadith are all general and unrestricted hadith.

But there are other sahih ahaadith that can be brought that limit that. And one
example is his [the Prophet (SAW)],

'Whoever dies and he knows La ilaha illallah, then he will enter the Jannah,'

And he (SAW) has also said,

'I bear witness that La ilaha illallah and that I am the Messenger of Allah. And no
slave will meet Allah not having any doubt in them (the two statements above)
except that he will enter the Jannah,' Related by Imaam Muslim (RH) in his Kitaab
ulImaan.

And he also made a statement to Abu Huraira (RAA) in a long hadith,

'Whoever you meet from behind this wall bearing witness of La ilaha illallah, with
certainty in his heart of it, then announce to him the good news of the Jannah,'
Collected by Imaam Muslim (RH) and classified as sahih.

He (SAW) has also stated,

'There is no one who bears witness of La ilaha illallah and that Muhammad is His
slave and His Messenger with sincerity of his heart except that Allah has made it
haraam on him to enter the Fire,' collected by Imaam alBukhaari and Imaam
Muslim (RHM).

He (SAW) also says the words,

'Give good news to the people of my intercession for whoever says, La ilaha
illallah, sincerely from his heart or soul,' Collected by Imaam alBukhaari (RH).

He (SAW) has mentioned,

'Allah has made the Fire haraam on whoever said La ilaha illallah, seeking with that
the face of Allah, Mighty and Majestic,' collected by Imaam Bukhaari and Imaam
Muslim (RHM)

All of these ahaadith make clear the heavy conditions and restrictions which the
word of tawhid is limited with and the fact that it is not just merely a statement that
is mouthed with the tongue!!!

And these conditions and restrictions are taken by establishing and following the
authentic evidences from the Book and the Sunna.

And we will see from all of these conditions what is strengthened by the word of
the Reality, Blessed and Exalted is He, from the authentic ahaadith of the Prophet
(SAW) that establish that.

And all of it is strengthened by the reality of tawhid in action which is what people
are seeking after and that it is not merely just a statement or only the statement La
ilaha illallah.

But it is absolutely necessary for the one who says it that he is sincere and certain
and knowledgeable of its' conditions, judgements, orders, prohibitions and
boundaries and in general knowing its' halaal and haraam (and this means what it
has made halaal and what it has made haraam) having complete certainty of it in his
heart,

believing in it absolutely, without entertaining any doubt at all. For there is no
benefit in belief in Allah except with knowledge of certainty and that certainty is
imaan in totality.

And submission to it is complete submission and acceptance of it in all matters of
his life in the time which he goes to the limit for the love of Allah and for the
pleasure of Allah, Mighty and Majestic.

And he accepts and submits to all of it with his heart and his limbs to what Allah
and His Messenger love, even if that opposes his desire. And he flees with all that
he has from all that displeases and is hated by Allah and His Messenger, even if he
is inclined towards it with desire,

END OF PART 1.

ZIONISTS JEWS ON THE HUNT;
IBM Under The Eyes of The Zionists

If things had really not worsened enough for the general world population since the
advent of Jewish domination, yet another travesty is taking place. A book has now
been published implicating IBM in the Holocaust that occurred in Hitler's rampage
across Europe.

The book, IBM and the Holocaust, is being used to show the German subsidiary of
IBM in Germany was linked to the terror of the National Socialist Party. It is
alleged that IBM offered the Nazis ticket machines and ticket counting technology
to help with the systematic destruction of those being housed in the concentration
camps.

It is further insinuated that the IBM branch of Germany knew what the Germans
were doing with these machines and failed to stop them. After the war, IBM was
given the profits from the war and what could be reaped from the use of their
machines by the Nazi regime.

The Holocaust Memorial has therefore decided to strike back and has demanded
restitution for the loss of Jewish lives during the war. However, IBM in the United
States, now being controlled by the Jews, is being given immunity as the Jews take
legal action against the German, non-Jewish branch of the multi-billion dollar
company.

What this all shows is just one more attack by the Jews on whoever differs with
them and whoever gets in the way of their domination, even if it may be other Jews
standing in the way of the progress of Jewish world conquest.

The Jews already dominate the world currency with the Federal Reserve Bank.
They have already claimed and are in the process of taking restitution from the
countries Switzerland, Germany as well as most recently the Arabian Peninsula for
its' role in the killing of Jewish men in the Khaibar, Bani Nadir and Bani Quraiza
wars.

They control the major market of world aeronautics, the value of gold, the UN
assembly, the Tribunal Commission and countless other institutions. They question
the past of other individuals and hold their grand, great and great great grandfathers
responsible for what 'crimes' they have done against the Jews.

But who will question the Jews? What of their killing of the prophets? What of the
attempted murder of `Isa, Muhammad, Musa, Harun (AS) and many others? Why,
the very families of Muhammad (SAW) that are existent today deserve full
restitution for what crimes the Jews did against the Muslims.

Those who are descendants of the Aws and Khazraj tribes in Madinah deserve
restitution and a world apology for the Jews funding them in a bloody war of
attrition against eachother and charging them back-breaking interest rates before
the advent of Muhammad (SAW) in Madinah.

The Jews owe the Muslims an apology for the monstrous behaviour of Tomas De
Torquemada (a Catholic convert from a Jewish family), the Grand Inquisitor, the
confessor of Queen Isabella and the spearhead for the Inquisition, 500 years of
funded and state-sponsered terrorism against Islam and Muslims.

Restitution is also owed to the Muslims by the Jews due to the destruction of the
khilaafa system with the help of Jewish bankers from the years 1919-1924. This
would require most likely the apprehending of most of the Jewish wealth available.

The Jews indeed also owe Muslims an apology for destroying the alMaghribi
quarter in Palestine when they took over in 1948. This was given to some of the
Mujaahidin as a gift from Salaah ud-Din alAyyubi (RH) for their dedicated service
to Islam.

The Jews have outstanding debts for the destruction of the former Muslim regions
of Deir Yassin, Nablus, Jaffa, Gaza, Bethlehem and most of Jerusalem. This is of
course if we forget about the other damage done in Palestine to the Islamic
museums, the Shari`a courts, the families of the scholars and the countryside.

Outside of this, there is the general environment of pollution, homosexuality,
transsexuality, sex change operations and other horrors to the mind of the sincere
believer.

To their long list of atrocities should also be added the fire that wrecked a great
deal of Masjid alAqsa, the storming of the Dome of the Rock, the firebombing of
the alAqsa complex, the attempts to demolish the site, the violation of the territorial
integrity of a nation and illegal search and siezure on more than one thousand
occasions.

Let us not be absent-minded so that we should become forgetful about the
atrocities of the Golan Heights, Gaza, the West Bank, the piping of sewage through
residential areas and the diverting of drinking water for needy people to swimming
pools and jacuzzis in Jewish holiday camps in settlements in the Golan Heights.

Indeed, if we were to pile up all of that which the Jews owed the Ummah through
their evil and treachery, every single wretched Jew would be a pauper. But let us
look at the hypocrisy! Look at this pure nifaaq (hypocrisy) that we are being
shown!

Here are the Jews, the funders of the French Revolution, the bringers of
pornography to the first talking movies, the funding of pornographic records and
much more than that.

This is why Allah (SWT) has rightly said,

'They say, "We are only reformers and peacemakers." Is it not that they are the
corrupters? But they do not perceive,' Surat ulBaqarah, ayaat 11-12.

This era, unfortunately for us, is becoming the era of the money-grubbing Jew, bent
on making others pay for the crimes that others are responsible for in the past.

Yet they are not willing to take responsibility for what they are doing now and what
they have done for the past 2,000 years by terrorising Muslims in particular and
humanity in general.

The non-Jewish kuffar, even though they are evil, have also reacted in the past to
Jewish aggression when they were strong Christians. Under the movement of
National Socialism, Adolph Hitler saw through the Jewish domination behind
communism.

Unfortunately, the Jews acted swiftly, and in World War II took the world's
attention off what they were perpetrating and focused it on fratricide among other
Christian nations.

Once Christianity was dismantled and removed from the public view of the people,
secularism came to be dominant. The Jews became equals to other men for they
were the makers of the rules of the game.

But how many people will keep playing this game? How many will continue to be
deceived by this thin veneer of the 'oppressed Jew' and begin to see the problem
for what it is?

How long will it take people to see the Jewish connection in history to world
barbarism and world terrorism in addition to attacking the revelation of Allah and
the slaughtering of the Prophets?

May Allah deliver us from the plan of these people and may He make us victorious
over them and their plots. Amin.

THE IMAAMS OF THE TWELVERS;
What Should Be Our Position?

In one of the back issues of the alJihaad newsletter, we covered what the position
should be towards the Shi`a and the different groups that make up this movement.

We also tried as best we could to present what the proper methodology should be
towards those who espouse the Shi`a creed, with making a clear distinction
between the one who claims the Shi`a creed out of culture and ignorance and the
one who subscribes to it with firm conviction and knowledge of its' tenets.

It was also our attempt to make sure that the Shi`a were understood in light of who
they were, thus this required an understanding of the different groups. Then came
the necessary preamble that the distinction had to be drawn between the Aghaa
Khaani, `Alawi, Zaidi and so forth.

But there is another reality that perhaps we had ignored. Maybe it was so subtle
that it moved by our sight without our knowing it. The question is valid, and in this
article, we will try our very best to answer it.

The question being posed to us is, what is the position of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah
towards the imaams that the Twelver Shi`a venerate?

There should be a distinction made between those who are venerated and the
venerators. This will make things easier to understand. Thus the article will focus on
the imaams, with an explanation of the position of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah
regarding them, insha'allah.

In regards to Ahl us-Sunna's position towards the twelve imaams that are
venerated by the Shi`a, we are between takfir and blind worship. We certainly do
not make takfir on these imaams, due to the fact that they did not hold the Twelver
creed, and there is no satisfactory evidence to warrant that they were upon the
Raafidi creed as practiced by those who follow them.

We also do not blindly worship them as the Rawaafidah do, going to their graves,
believing that they have all of the keys to the unseen as well as to the hearts of
people.

Therefore, we do not go to the excess of those who venerate and we do not fall
into the plan of Shaitan and denigrate.

THE TWELVE IMAAMS AND AHL US-SUNNA

We know a large amount of how the 12 imaams believed and operated primarily
from their own statements, even though those who proclaim them to be their
leaders ignore their vehemently 'Sunni' statements.

Their beliefs and way of conducting themselves was completely matching with the
Sunna. An example of that would be the fact that Imaam Abu Hanifa (RH) was
indeed trained in some of his beginning hadith sciences by none other than Imaam
Ja`far as-Saadiq (RH), who the Twelver Shi`a venerate to the level of shirk.

The Twelver Shi`a somehow use this as an evidence to proclaim the truth of the
Twelver creed. However, upon examination, it actually incriminates them. If Imaam
Abu Hanifa (RH) was trained by Imaam as-Saadiq (RH), he should be Raafidi as
the Twelver Shi`a proclaim their imaam to be.

But in fact that is not the case. But these Shi`a would insist that Ja`far as-Saadiq
would have to be a Twelver Shi`a, due to the fact that his father Imaam
Muhammad alBaaqir (RH) is also one of their imaams.

But was he? Let us again turn to history. When Imaam Muhammad alBaaqir (RH)
met Imaam Abu Hanifa (RH), he questioned him about several points in qiyaas
(analogy). This was due to the fact that a rumour was going around that Abu Hanifa
(RH) was using qiyaas to refute the Sunna.

The discussion began thus,

Imaam Muhammad alBaaqir: "So you are the man that contradicts the ahaadith of
my grandfather on the basis of qiyaas (analogy)?"

Imaam Abu Hanifa: "Hasha lillah (Allah forbid)! Who would contradict ahaadith?
Please sit down and allow me to explain my position."

Imaam Abu Hanifa (RH) asked, "Who is the weaker, the man or the woman?"
Imaam alBaaqir (RH) replied, "The woman." Abu Hanifa (RH) continued, "Which
of them is entitled to the larger part of the inheritance?" "The man," replied Imaam
alBaaqir (RH).

Imaam Abu Hanifa (RH) then replied, "If I had been doing istimbaat (deduction)
based on qiyaas (analogy), then I would have said that the woman should get the
larger share, for indeed on the surface the weaker one is entitled to more
consideration."

But the dialogue did not stop there. Things continued further. Imaam alBaaqir (RH)
was next asked,

"Which is the higher duty, prayer or fasting?"

Imaam alBaaqir (RH) logically replied, "Prayer." This is when the father of Ahl
us-Sunna walJama`ah said, "If that is the case, then it should be permissible for a
woman during menstruation to make up her prayers and not her fasts [this is if Abu
Hanifa (RH) was to prefer qiyaas to the ahaadith]. But my fatwa is that she make
up her fasts and not her prayers," `Uqud ulJumaam, Ch. 16.

It was at that point that Imaam Muhammad ibn alQaasim alBaaqir (RH) lept from
his seat and kissed Imaam Abu Hanifa (RH) on the forehead, as his answers were
matching with Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah.

If Imaam alBaaqir (RH) was upon the Twelver creed, could he really have listened
to the creed of a 'Sunni' being expounded upon and then agree to it. Of course this
would have been implausible.

And what of his son, Imaam as-Saadiq (RH)? Would he have taught Imaam Abu
Hanifa (RH) ahaadith while he was a 'Sunni' and Imaam as-Saadiq was a Raafidi?
No, not plausible.

It is also known in a famous statement from Imaam as-Saadiq (RH), 'alMut`ah
(temporary marriage) is fornication and adultery,' Please see Fath ulBaari in the
Book of Marriage for more details as well as alMughni in the Book of Marriage.

This is in direct contrast to the Twelver creed, which honours and proclaims mut`a
a sacred virtue.

And what is more, how would Imaam as-Saadiq (RH) be a Raafidi when his father
bore witness that he was from Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah in front of Imaam Abu
Hanifa (RH)? All of these questions and historical analysis would lead us to the
conclusion that the imaams that the Twelvers are panting after were from the way
of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah.

The august personalities of these men has been hijacked by the villains of history.
But one of the Rawaafidah might say, 'Those two imaams being around Abu Hanifa
just shows that back them, the Twelver creed was accepted by the "Sunni"
imaams. It is only in modern times that people are contesting it.'

We answer this accusation with another incident in Imaam Abu Hanifa's (RH) life.
There was once that the imaam wanted to refute the Shi`a, so he went to where
they had a domicile and went inside, holding his shoes in his hand.

The Twelvers immediately recognised him and took offense to his holding his shoes
in his hand in the masjid. They questioned him, 'Why are you holding your shoes in
your hand and not leaving them as the others.'

The imaam replied masterfully, 'The Shi`a in the time of the Messenger (SAW)
used to steal the shoes of the people, so I carry mine with me.'

One Shi`a, incredulous, shouted out, 'Abu Hanifa, your a liar! There were no Shi`a
in the time of the Prophet (SAW)!'

The imaam replied, 'That is because you are bid`a (innovation), and every
innovation is astrayness and every astrayness is in the Fire.'

He was driven from the masjid, but the point was clear. The imaam despised the
Twelvers and their creed. So this would shut the door on any claim to a Shi`a/Sunni
dialogue.

It is then clear to the reader that the imaams that the Shi`a follow and the Raafidi
creed are two different fixtures entirely.

Another charge that stands against the Twelvers and their attributing the Twelver
creed to their imaams is the story of one, Imaam Zaid ibn `Ali ibn alHussain ibn `Ali
ibn Abi Taalib (RH).

Before the revolt against the khalifa of the time, Imaam Zaid (RH) was considered
one of the grand imaams by the Twelver fanatics. He was seen as one of their
people. But then something amazing happened that was to change this belief.

During that time, Imaam Zaid (RH) had collected an army to go out against the
khalifa of the time, Hishaam ibn `Abdul Maalik (RH). When the army was
organised, the imaam had no idea that some of them were Twelvers, until before
heading into battle they put the following statement to him,

'And what do YOU say of Abu Bakr and `Umar?'

The imaam replied solemnly, 'I do not curse or denounce the two imaams [meaning
Abu Bakr and `Umar (RAA)].' This left the Twelvers absolutely incensed. They
abandoned marching out with him and subsequently he was left to do battle on his
own with little man power or supplies.

When left to his own, he shouted out, 'Tarafaduni (You have abandoned me)!!!'
Please see `Uqud ulJumaan. This word is where the term, Rawaafidah
(Abandoners i.e. of the creed of Ahl us-Sunna) sprang from in the first place. And
it is what Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah has referred to them as ever since.

So without any doubt, we know that this imaam, who they have since ceased
genuflecting to, was upon the creed of Ahl us-Sunna and was clear regarding the
Sahaaba (RAA). We can also bring the evidence of the fact that Imaam Sufyaan
ath-Thawri (RH) was also a Zaidi.

When asked if he was a Zaidi by a student he said, 'Of course, I am a man of
Kufa!' For more details, please see Tafsir Sufyaan ath-Thawri in the introduction.

Imaam Sufyaan ath-Thawri (RH) was one of the mujtahid mutlaq (an absolute
mujtahid able to form his own madhhab with evidences and his principles in fatwa)
imaams and a contemporary of Imaam Abu Hanifa (RH) and Imaam Maalik (RH),
so if he was upon the Raafidi belief, rest assured this would not have have gone
unnoticed.

So who are these Rawaafidah trying to fool with ascribing to the imaams beliefs of
blasphemy that they so doggedly cling to in their fossilised creed?!

THE IMAAMS IN HISTORY

Another thing that should be mentioned about the imaams that the Twelvers have
attached themselves to is that they are men of action, always enjoining the right and
forbidding the wrong.

Due to the fact that they were related to the Messenger (SAW), these imaams
were relentless in their drive to see that the Shari`a was always in full swing and
being amply implemented.

And when the darkness of oppression was seen, it was then that the imaams sprung
into action, the quickest to correct the ruler and enjoin the right and forbid the
wrong.

As with all people of knowledge and sincerity, they had to face the trials and tests
that this entailed. Some suffered violently and others were killed and still others
tortured.

This battle between oppression and those trying to halt it had increbible effects.
These men were viewed as imaams and great men, and not once were they ever
viewed as Khawaarij for going out against the rulers, much less Rawaafidah.

For their going out against the rulers in regards to their oppression was as much
justified as Imaam `Abdul Qaadir alJilaani (RH) cursing the rulers from the mimbar
in his masjid on Fridays.

We have prepared a short list for the reader to observe, along with care being
taken that these imaams were not going out of the ruler merely based on lineage or
some ancestral right, but violations that according to the ijtihaad of these imaams
was now unbearable and deserved to be rectified.

Imaam an-Nafs udh-Dhakiyyah, whose name was Muhammad ibn `Abdullah ibn
Hasan ibn Hasan ibn `Ali ibn Abi Taalib was killed in 145 AH (762 AD) fighting
against the reign of alMansur who was from the `Abbasiyyah Khilaafa.

Imaam Abu Hanifa (RH) secretly supported him with contributions and Imaam
Maalik (RH) said that the bai`a that people gave him was sound.

Imaam Abu `Abdullah Hussain ibn `Ali ibn Hassan ibn Hassan ibn Hassan ibn `Ali
ibn Abi Taalib (RH) was martyed in the year 167 AH (784 AD) going against the
khilaafa of alHaadi [d.170 AH (786 AD)] and was left to be eaten by the
scavenging animals and birds, please see Tarikh at-Tabari, V. 6.

Imaam AbulHasan Musa Kaazim ibn Ja`far as-Saadiq ibn Muhammad ibn alBaaqir
was arrested and kept in jail until his death in 183 AH (799 AD) by the then khalifa
Harun ar-Rashid, Tarikh alYa`qubi, V. 3.

Imaam Muhammad ibn Ja`far as-Saadiq (RH) went against the khalifa alMa'mun
by revolting in the Hijaaz and Makkah.

Imaam `Ali ar-Rida ibn Musa Kaazim ibn Ja`far as-Saadiq ibn Muhammad ibn
alQaasim (RH) fought against the khalifa Mu`tasim until he was captured after his
defeat.

Imaam Ibrahim ibn Musa Kaazim ibn Ja`far as-Saadiq (RH) went against the rulers
of Yemen and fought valiently.

Imaam Zaid ibn `Ali ibn alHussain ibn `Ali ibn Abi Taalib (RH) fought against
tyranny in 121 AH (739 AD) when he went out against the khalifa of the time,
Hishaam ibn `Abdul Maalik (RH). This move would cost him his life. He would be
martyred when most of his army deserted him.

But this line of imaams and their stuggle against the khilaafa systems brings us to a
question that some might ask in confusion. The Twelvers would be exultant over
the supposed 'confusion' that this would bring and the Muslims dismayed as the
what exactly we should think of Islamic history.

The question on their tongues is, 'Then do we accept the authority of those imaams
and expunge the history books of Ahl us-Sunna walJama`ah from the names of the
khalifas that these imaams have fought against?'

This is a valid question. This is due to the fact that we just mentioned praising these
imaams and that their action was correct. So what is the correct way? We say,
'Those who revolted are right, and those who were ruling were right.'

This might seem to be a preposterous remark to make on such a serious subject,
but we ask that the reader stay patient and read our response carefully.

The reason why those who revolted were right was due to the fact of the hadith of
the Prophet (SAW) that states,

'Listen and obey... unless you see clear kufr (kufrun bawaahan),' collected by
Muslim, Bukhaari and others and classified as sahih. But who would call any of
those rulers back then kuffar?

You are right, absolutely no one. But the kufr does not have to be major kufr, but it
can be a propogation of the minor which necessitates correction. The imaams that
revolted were also upon the principle of the next hadith,

'Listen and obey, unless you see clear ma`siah (disobedience) to Allah,' collected
by Imaam Ibn Hibbaan (RH) and classified as sahih. Thus any disobedience, taking
the land of the believers without right, murder and all of these things deserves
correction.

The imaams had on their tongues very well the hadith of Jaabir ibn `Abdullah
(RAA), where the Sahaaba (RAA) were quoted as saying,

'We were ordered to hit with this (pointing with the sword) whoever went outside
of this (pointing to the Qur'an),' mentioned in the Fataawa of Imaam Ibn
Taymiyyah, V. 35 and classified as sahih.

With these ahaadith and many ayaat from the Qur'an, these imaams attempted to
redress the wrongs that were occurring in the time that they lived in and the rulers
that they had.

The position of the khalifas in that time was similar. They too had ayaat and
ahaadith to back their position. One of them was the hadith where the Prophet
(SAW) said,

'If there was a khalifa on Earth, even if he flogs you and takes your property, then
obey him even if you have to die biting the root of a tree,' Collected by Imaams
Abu Dawud and Ahmad (RHM) and classified as sahih.

They also understood the next hadith to be a proof for them against those who they
saw as a danger to their khilaafa system,

'The khilaafa is the shade of Allah in the Earth, and whoever honours him, Allah
honours him. And whoever hates him (the ruler), Allah hates him (the person
against the ruler),' collected by Imaam Ibn Abi `Aasim and classified as hasan.

They also have the statement of the Messenger (SAW) on their side when he said,
'Hold all together to the rope of Allah and do not be divided,' collected by Imaam
Muslim and Ahmad (RHM) and classified as sahih.

There is also a verse with the Qur'an that matches with the hadith above. So our
position with these imaams is that they had a right and that the rulers also had their
right. This situation can have the similarity drawn between it and the incident of `Ali
and Mu`awiyah (RAA).

Mu`awiyah (RAA), a scholar made his ijtihaad regarding the murder of `Uthmaan
(RAA) and came to the conclusion that the murder should be solved and rectified
first.

`Ali ibn Abi Taalib (RAA) had a different ijtihaad in the matter. This resulted in
difference between the khalifa and one of his subjects, namely Mu`awiyah (RAA).

The same thing happened upon the appointment of Yazid ibn Mu`awiyah (RAA) to
be khalifa. His father, Mu`awiyah (RAA) appointed his son and this was done by
ijtihaad, thus he saw no harm in it.

Others however saw the khilaafa starting to become a dynastic rulership, with
hereditary thrones beginning to form. This is one of the reasons why opposition
mounted early in the reign of Yazid.

So although in most instances, allegiance is due to the khalifa, even if he is an
oppressive one but he is not doing major kufr or replacing the law of Allah with
another one, there are times when the khalifa can be revolted against due to
disobedience and this is the reasoning and understanding that the imaams were
upon in those situations.

Another situation that we can think of is when Shaikh ulIslam Muhammad ibn
`Abdul Wahhaab (RH) revolted against one of the policies of the then khalifa in his
time.

Although his bai`a was with the khalifa in all matters, there was one that he felt the
khalifa was deficient in, that being the policy towards grave worship. The imaam
thought that not enough was being done, while the khalifa believed the stronger
priority was to defend the borders of the Islamic state.

Thus both of them had their understandings, and there was the truth in their
understanding. And the final point is that this was between those parties and Allah,
so it indeed is not our affair in this day and time to debate these issues that are no
longer extent and which we did not witness.

Therefore, it is prudence on our part to avoid these troubles. We will narrate two
incidents to show the importance of avoiding matters that do not concern us.

Once, Imaam Abu Hanifa (RH) was asked about the fighting between Mu`awiyah
(RAA) and `Ali ibn Abi Taalib (RAA) and he replied, 'My mind is occupied with
many things to come on the Day of Judgement for which I will be asked. And I am
sure that this is not one of them,' `Uqud ulJumaam.

On another occasion, Shaikh ulIslam `Abdur-Rahmaan ibn alJawzi (RH) was
speaking in a khutba. During that khutba, a man rose up and began to defend the
house of `Ali (RAA) and to defame the other three khalifas. Imaam Ibn alJawzi
(RH) replied, 'Well sit down, for you are better than everyone else.'

And may Allah keep us away from the matters that do not benefit us and that might
harm us. Amin.

.

IMAAM IBN QUDAAMAH (RH);
A Biography; From Among The Grand Imaams

If one mentions the names Shaikh Ibn Taymiyyah (RH) or Imaam Ibn Kathir (RH),
many would know who they are due to commercialisation of their names by some
of the Islam vendors and academics who use them to solidify their positions.

But how many have heard of the Shaikh who they called Shaikh? Indeed, not many
have. Some in the English speaking world might have thought that Ibn Taymiyyah
(RH) came about on his own or that he just was born great, not taught to be great.

But instead of this simplistic idea, it was actually one of his teachers and one of the
great teachers who put this profound understanding in him, and this great one is the
subject of this alJihaad's biography.

He is referred to by the `Ulama as 'the grand imaam, the unique `aalim, the
honoured scholar, the preferred teacher, Shaikh ulIslam, the head of the `Ulama,
the imaam of Ahl us-Sunna and the remainder of the salaf, the mufti of the Ummah,'
al`Allamah Shaikh Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudaamah (RH).

Born as `Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Qudaamah ibn Miqdaam ibn
Nasr ibn `Abdullah ibn alMaqdisi ad-Dimishqi as-Saalihi, he was born in the month
of Sha`baan in the year 541 AH (1146 AD) in Jamaa`il and preceded to Dimashq
(Damascus) with his people when he was ten years old.

He was mainly given tutelage on reciting and memorising the Qur'an as well as
putting into memory the commentary of the great imaam, al`Allamah Abul Qaasim
`Umar ibn alHussain ibn `Abdullah ibn Ahmad alKhirqi [d. 334 RH (945 AD)
(RH)] on the subject of fiqh from the Hanbali school of law.

He would continue on in his endeavours, learning from his father Shaikh Ahmad
(RH) and from Abul Mukaarim ibn Hilaal (RH) and Abul Ma`aali ibn Saabir (RH)
and other scholars. He would later in his years decide to travel to Baghdaad to
persue his education in fiqh.

He would not go alone. Rather, he would take the son of his maternal aunt,
alHaafiz `Abdul Ghaani (RH) as a companion when he set off in the year 561 AH
(1166 AD) at 20 years of age.

He was to hear much knowledge from al `Allamah ad-Diqaaq ibn alBatti (RH) and
Shaikh Sa`dallah ad-Dajjaaji (RH) and the grand imaam, Shaikh al`Allamah 'Abdul
Qaadir alJilaani (RH).

All of this knowledge did not finish his appetite, so he continued on, learning from
the likes of Shaikh Ibn Taaj alQurraa, Shaikh Ibn Shaafi`, Shaikh Abu Zar`a and
Shaikh Yahya ibn Thaabit (RHM), all of whom he learned the principles of
etiquette and manners from.

He returned to Baghdaad after a long journey in the year 567 AH (1172 AD). He
would remain there fore some time, but then young 'Abdullah (RH) would decide
to go on hajj in the year 574 AH (1178 AD), where he would meet Shaikh
an-Naasih ibn alHanbali (RH) and other steller personalities from his madhhab.

Once he finished his hajj, he decided to once again go to Iraq. This time he would
stay for one year, hearing lessons from the likes of Shaikh Ibn alManni alHanbali
(RH). Shaikh an-Naasih (RH) was amazed by Ibn Qudaamah's steadfastness and
his studious behaviour.

For while he and others were busy learning Shaikh Abul Fath's (RH) works and
writings, Ibn Qudaamah (RH) was rushing about and upon his return to Damascus
was still working on his groundbreaking explanation of 'alMughni fi Sharh ilKhirqi.'

When he had finished, the work numbered some 10 volumes and the love of his
life, fiqh, had finally been enumerated. Shaikh Ibn Qudaamah (RH) was a very
contemplative person and had a way about him that impressed all of the other
'ulama around him.

WHAT THE 'ULAMA SAID OF HIM

Al `Allamah Haafiz Diyaa ud-Din alMaqdisi (RH), when mentioning Imaam Ibn
Qudaamah (RH), made the following glowing attribution,

'He was imaam in the Qur'an and its' tafsir, imaam in the science of hadith, imaam in
fiqh and unique in his time in it, imaam in knowledge of difference of opinion and he
was unparalleled and inique in his time in the forms of inheritance and imaam in Usul
ulFiqh...' there is more, but for the sake of brevity, we will cease quoting this
scholar.

al'Allamah Sabt ibn alJawzi (RH), the grandson of the famous Shaikh Abul Faraj
Ibn alJawzi (RH) said of Ibn Qudaamah (RH),

'There was no one in his time, after his brothers Abu 'Umar and al'Imaad more to
abstain from the world and more worshipful than him.

'Whoever saw him, it is as if he saw a part of the Sahaaba and it is as if there was a
light coming from his face. Every night he did much worship and recited one
seventh of the Qur'an in one night.'

Thus the amazing behaviour of the imaam was seen and known by everyone. He
was respected and loved by all of the 'ulama around him. Others always felt
pleasent in his company and many saw him as the grandest of the Hanbali `ulama in
particular and all the others in general.

So much so, that let us read the words of Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah (RH) and what he
said about him,

'NO ONE has entered Syria after alAwzaa`ii [an imaam from Syria who was
contemporary with Abu Hanifa (RH). If you would like to know more, please wait
for the upcoming biography about him.] greater in fiqh than Shaikh alMuwaffaq
(RH).'

Indeed Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah (RH) was from Syria and he proclaimed Ibn
Qudaamah (RH) greater than him! This is Ibn Taymiyyah (RH) speaking. This is
who he called SHAIKH! These are the grand 'ulama who all the people gave
respect to and held in the highest regard, more so than Ibn Taymiyyah (RH).

HIS WORKS

His works for the sake of Islam totalled an amazing amount. However, we will
mention some of the more famous ones that others gain from. We will start first
with his work in Usul ud-Din:

One of them is assuredly his amazing work, alMughni, which is 10 volumes in his
own writing. However, his nephew also added his comments, causing the work to
swell to a total of 12 volumes.

He has also written another work, known as alKaafi, which spans 4 volumes,
alMaqna' which is merely one volume and a summarised addition of the work
alHidaayah by Abul Khataab.

Imaam Ibn Qudaamah (RH) authored another work entitled al`Umdah, totalling
one small volume and added to it the work alManaasik ulHajj which is again one
volume.

His work in Usul ulFiqh composed of the following treatises,

Rawdat un-Naazir walJannat ulMunaazir and other editions. In his work on
language, he has three works, and in zuhd he has about six works altogether.

Muslims in general will benefit from his works and those from his madhhab will also
take something away from his contributions.

AMAZING SINCERITY

He would also come to be a world-renowned hero for his participation in the
jihaad against the Crusaders in which he accompanied and fought alongside Salaah
ud-Din alAyyubi (RH). It was a valiant struggle and Islam benefited from the
strength that Imaam Ibn Qudaamah (RH) offered on the battlefield.

The grand `aalim 'Abdullah ibn Qudaamah, came to breathe his last on 'Eid ulFitr of
the month of Shawwaal in the year 620 AH (1223 AH) at the age of 79 in his
house in Dimashq (Damascus). Many people came to his funeral, which was
presided over and carried out by his nephew.

For all of his greatness, when he departed the world the people even remembered
him. Indeed a great life was blessed with a great end.

In his life, the imaam was also very occupied with his family and taking care of
them. His wife bore him several children, but unfortunately none of them survived
him. All went to Allah in his lifetime.

But one thing can be for sure. The children that he left behind after his death are
much more numerous. Those that take the knowledge from his books and take
from his example indeed are in a sense looking to him as a fatherly figure.

So although the lineage of his was interrupted by the lack of children, the lineage
through his knowledge will never be interrupted. And may Allah reward him and
the other righteous scholars. Amin.

.

UNITED ON ZIONISM AND HATE;
Ariel Sharon and Ehud Barak Share A Bloody History

ANOTHER GANGSTER IS LOOSE ISRAEL CASTS ITS' VOTE

Some of the Muslims that witnessed the elections of Ariel Sharon thought nothing
of it in the way of the future of the Middle East.

What is the difference, they thought, Sharon and Ehud Barak were both gangsters
and were known for their thuggery.

But what is different is the stance and history of the men. When the people of Israel
went to vote for Sharon, they wanted the Muslims to understand that peace went
out of the window and that even the young have had their fill of the peace process.

This is due to the fact of the history of Ariel Sharon. Indeed, both Sharon and his
rival were in the security services in Israel, but Sharon's history is even more
covered with blood. For one thing, he is the one that pushed the stride of the Israel
into the Lebanon conflict.

This ignited the conflict even more and ultimately lead to a blood bath in which
many of the 'sons of Zion' went to the grave without victory. Ariel Sharon is also
the same one that was the harshest with the Muslims on the West Bank.

When he was working in the security forces, there was the most violence in the
West Bank, so he was one of the catalysts that started the first intifada in
December 7, 1987.

And most recently, he is the same one who caused the recent intifada uprising upon
his controversial visit to the Masjid AlAqsa and Dome of the Rock complex. This
visit brought consternation from the Muslim world, but the Jews portrayed the
situation merely as if the man had been walking down the street and then he was
accosted.

This man walked onto the Masjid alAqsa complex and into the masjid! What is
more offensive than this action? Perhaps one of the Jews would understand if we
came into their synagogue and moved the Torah and put the Qur'an there instead.

This is the same Ariel Sharon who supported the Temple Mount Faithful, a
messianic Jewish group who years ago put an add in the newspaper and
proclaimed that they would be laying the foundation stone for the Third Jewish
Temple on the site of the Masjid alAqsa complex.

What happens next is predictable. Muslims rise to defend the Masjid complex and
unspeakable horrors take place. Groups of people are murdered, women are
injured, children killed, men shot in the back as the run away and much more
carnage.

Thus as Muslims we should understand the decision that the Israeli people took
when they voted Sharon into power. Others, such as the Hamas group, the
Vanguards of the Conquest and Islaami Jihaad, also understand history. This was
why when they election took place and Sharon emerged as the victory, a press
release was given by the above mentioned jama`aat proclaiming that now the jihaad
was to go into full scale.

But some Muslims are still supposedly praying for this 'peace of Jerusalem' in which
Jews with their black hats, Muslims with their jalabiyyahs, Christians with their
frocks and atheistic Jews with their Levi jeans will all stand around and sing paeans
of peace together.

This is not the case. This will not occur. Those who are watching the situation
unfold are seeing anything but the settling of affairs and implementation of world
peace. What they are seeing is the escalation of a conflict which will have its' apex
in the advent of the Mahdi and `Isa ibn Maryam (AS)

And may Allah make us among those who fight in their army and stand firm for the
truth.

.

MUSLIMS SMOKING;
What Is The Islamic Verdict

FATWA IN THE MATTER OF SMOKING

Written by Shaikh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim [(RH) (Hanbali) d. 1378 (1960 AD)]

Praise be to Allah alone, and peace and blessings be upon the one who there is no
prophet after him. And what comes next:

I have already been asked regarding the judgement in tobacco, which many of the
ignorant, idiotic and foolish people are fond of smoking.

Regarding what is known is that it is well known by EVERY ONE of its'
prohibition. This includes us (the Hanbali people), our shaikhs, the shaikhs of our
shaikhs and all of the people of knowledge from the imaams of da'awa in the Najd
(a province in the Peninsula) and all of the people of knowledge of the same calibre
as them from amongst the 'Ulama in ALL of the different places.

Who is pliant towards its' (tobacco) presence after 1,100 years or more until our
time that we are in, claiming and calling to that it is on the Shari`a principles or the
rules that have been laid down?! And I did not see an answer for that, but looking
to that the questioner asked regarding the spreading of this filthy thing in what is not
seen to be dangerous to the head, the answer follows upon that. So I (Shaikh
Muhammad ibn Ibrahim) said,

There is no doubt in the filth of smoking and tobacco, its' addiction and its'
stinginess. And its' prohibition is by the authentic text and the pure and
unadulterated intellect and the words of the knowledgeable and esteemed
physicians.

FIRSTLY: THE AUTHENTIC TEXT

Allah the Exalted says,

'Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet who is illiterate which they found
written in the Torah and the Injil, he orders them with righteousness and forbids
them from evil. He makes lawful for them the wholesome things and makes
forbidden the filthy things for them,' Surat ulA`araaf, ayah 157.

And it is narrated in the sahih from Ibn `Umar (RAA) that the Prophet (SAW) said,
'Every thing that intoxicates is a thing that covers the senses and all that covers the
senses and intellect is haraam.' And it is mentioned in Muslim, 'And every thing that
intoxicates is haraam.'

And it is related in a marfu' hadith from Abu Dawud and at-Tirmidhi, classified as
sahih, where `A'isha (RAA) stated, 'Every intoxicant is haraam and whatever
damages the senses, causes addiction and numbs the senses.'

So all of the bountious ayaat and sahih ahaadith are a proof on its' (smoking)
prohibition. For truly it is a filthy act, intoxicating, causing one too flee from their
normal self and addictive, and there is no debating in that except by the one who is
arrogant and an imbecile to the facts and the reality.

And there is no doubt moreover in acknowledgement of the prohibition of it
because it is from the things that intoxicate and the things that cause addiction and
the senses to flee.

And it is related by Imaam Ahmad, Abu Dawud from Umm Salamah (RAA), who
said, 'The Messenger forbid from every intoxicant and addictive thing that numbs
the senses.' AlHaafiz az-Zain al`Iraaqi said, 'It's chain of narration is authentic and
as-Suyuti classified it as Sahih in Jaami` us-Saghir.'

And in it (smoking) is the wasting of wealth and the destruction of the senses
without reason. And the person that is buying it sees it as a necessity for life in this
matter, and it is not of any importance. And it is narrated in the two sahih
collections from the Prophet (SAW) that he said,

'Truly Allah, He has made it haraam on you the following: 1. Disobedience to the
mothers 2. Abusing the daughters 3. Hindering and putting a stumbling block in
front of the weak what you hate for yourselves 4. Unnecessary speech 5.
Questioning incessantly and 5. Wasting wealth.'

It has now been explained, so next we will mention the words of the `Ulama from
the heads of the four madhhabs. So from those who have mentioned its'
prohibitions from the scholars of fiqh from the Hanafis is Shaikh Muhammad
al`Aini. He mentioned in his message, 'The Prohibition of Smoking,' four points,

"One: It is harmful to the person by the admission of the knowledgeable doctors
and all of what is like that is haraam to work with by the consensus.

"Two: It is from one of the agreed upon narcotics in their sight of the things that
have been forbidden from working with by the Shari`a. The hadith of Ahmad
narrated by Umm Salamah has, 'The Messenger (SAW) forbid from every
intoxicant and addictive thing that numbs the senses.'

"And it (smoking) causes listlessness, numbness and stupor in the limbs and nerve
endings by the consensus of the doctors. And their words are a proof in that and
likewise, the scholars of fiqh, classical and modern have also made consensus on
that.

"Three: Its' odour is disgusting and bothersome. It bothers and annoys people who
don't do it and specifically those who are gathered in salaah and otherwise. In
addition to this, it also harms and bothers the angels. And it has already been
related by the two others of the sahih collections (Bukhaari and Muslim) from
Jaabir (RAA) [from the Messenger (SAW)],

'Whoever eats garlic or onion, then let him isolate himself from us. And let him
isolate himself from our masjid and let him sit in his house.'

"And it is already well known that the odour of the smoke is not less harmful and
hated than the odour of garlic and onion. And it is mentioned in the two sahih
collections moreover from Jaabir (RAA) [from the Prophet (SAW)],

'The angels are offended and bothered by whatever people are offended and
bothered by.'

"And in the hadith from him (the Prophet) is that he has said,

'Whoever annoys or bothers a Muslim, then he has already annoyed me. And
whoever bothers and annoys me, then he has already annoyed and bothered Allah,'
related by at-Tabaraani in alAwsat from Anas (RAA) with a good chain of
narration.

"Four: It is intemperance and extravagance when there is nothing in it that benefits
in a halaal manner and the one who does it is harmed. On the contrary, it has harm
in it, and this has been found in information well investigated by the people who
have and know this information."

And from them is Abul Hasan alMasri alHanafi who said in his text, al Aathaar
an-Naqliyyat us-Sahihah wad-Dalaa'il il`Aqliyyat is-Sarihah Ta`lanu BiTahrim
id-Dukhaan ('The Distinguishing Mark of the Authentic Text and Evidences of the
Pure and Wise Intellect in Informing of the Prohibition of Smoking'),

"And it first to be known in the turn of the century. And the first to appear with it
was in the land of the Jews, Christians and pagans. And a Jewish man came with it
, claiming that he was wise to the land of Morocco. And he (the Jew) called people
to it. And the first one to take it to the land of the Mediterranean was a man by the
name of Kline from the Christians.

"The first to bring it to the land of Sudaan were the pagans. Then it was taken to
Egypt, Hijaaz (the Peninsula) and the other far reaching lands. And Allah has
forbidden from every single thing that intoxicates. And it is said that, 'It does not
intoxicate.' So it deprives and numbs the limbs and nerve endings of the one that is
consuming that into himself, internally and externally.

"And the actual intent and purpose behind stupification and intoxication is the
covering and enveloping of the intellect and senses.

"And if it is not an intensification and a magnification of those seeking gratification in
it (smoking), then there is no doubt that it happens to the one who is given it the
first time. And if he does not submit to that it intoxicates, then he is deluded, numb
and stupid.

"It has already been related by Imaam Ahmad and Abu Dawud from Umm
Salamah that the Messenger (SAW) forbid from all that intoxicates and is addictive
and numbs the senses.

"The `Ulama said, 'That which causes listlessness is what causes numbness,
addiction and weakness in the nerve endings.'

"And so you should consider this hadith as an evidence on the forbidden and
prohibition of it (smoking). And it harms the body, the soul and corrupts the heart.

"It weakens the strength and changes the colour to dull yellow. And the doctors
have gathered and agreed upon that it is harmful, it harms the body, the health and
virtue, the dignity, the honour and the wealth.

"And in it is the imitation of the rebellious, disobedient and astray people. For no
one consumes it in most instances except the rebellious and sinning people,
debased and vile cowards and the odour that issues forth from the mouth of the
one that consumes it is filthy and wretched."

And from the scholars of fiqh from the Hanbalis is Shaikh `Abdullah ibn Shaikh
Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhaab (may Allah have mercy on both of them and
sanctify their souls) who said in his second answer regarding tobacco after what he
related of the texts that make haraam intoxicants and he mentioned the words of
the people of knowledge in knowing intoxication of what is the text,

"And in what we mentioned from the words of the Messenger of Allah (SAW) and
the words of the people of knowledge in making clear to you that tobacco is
haraam, which is being used frequently in this time. As well is the widespread
narration among us and the witnesses and those who testified to its' intoxication in
part of the times specifically.

"When it became the vast majority or established fact it for a day or two that he did
not take it, then when he took it next, he became intoxicated and lost his intellect,
until the point when the one who took it spoke in front of people without being
aware of that, and we seek refuge in Allah from the horror and evil of harm and sin.

"And it is not right that one who believes in Allah and the Last Day should fall prey
to the words of any of the people when it has been made clear to him the words of
Allah and His Messenger in the likeness of issues and matters.

"And that is the witness by that the Messenger of Allah gave judgment to, in that his
obedience in whatever he ordered and abstaining from whatever he forbid and
warned people from and certainty in whatever he was informed about."

And Shaikh `Abdullah Abu Batin (RH) answered regarding tobacco, with the
words,

"What we think about it is that it is haraam on the following two grounds,

"One: It carries the intoxication whenever it is consumed. So if the consumer of it is
robbed of it for a period of time, then he consumed it or more of it, even if he does
not gain intoxication from it, he will bear the effect of narcoticisation, addiction and
numbness in the limbs and nerve endings.

"And it is related by Imaam Ahmad in a clear hadith that he (SAW) forbid from all
that intoxicates and causes addiction and numbs the senses and nerve endings.

"Two: That it is a putrescent and foul odour in the presence of the one who does
not take it. And the 'Ulama have argued with the wording of His, Exalted Be He,

'And He has made haraam upon them the filthy and putred things,' Surat ulA'araaf,
ayah 157.

"And as far as the one who is taking it, making it or preparing it, and he does not
think that it is putrescent and foul, then he has the likeness of the one who thinks he
caused it to cease being filthy due to some excuse."

And from the scholars of fiqh from the Shaafi'iis is Shaikh ash-Shahir Bin-Najm
alGhazi ash-Shaafi'ii, who said in his texts,

"And it is widely narrated that which happened when it (tobacco) came to Dimashq
(Damascus) in the year 1015 AH (1606 AD). It was claimed that the one who
consumes it does not get intoxicated.

"However, If he submitted to it, then he became addicted and that is haraam. And
the hadith of Ahmad with the narration from Umm Salamah who said, 'The
Messenger (SAW) forbid from all that intoxicates and is addictive and numbs the
senses.'

He (the Shaikh) said, "It (smoking) is not from the major sins, if it is gone into once
or twice. But on the contrary, persistence on it is a major sin like an abundance of
minor sins."

And it has already been mentioned by some of the `Ulama,

"The small sin receives the judgement of one major sin from five ways,

"One: persistence on it.

"Second: Indifference to it, and it is frivolity and being unconcerned with doing the
act and committing it.

"Third: Rejoicing and reveling in it.

"Fourth: Boasting about it among the people

"Fifth: Commencing of it by the one who knows regarding it or from the one who
imitates it (the act of smoking where one person follows the others).

"And Shaikh Khaalid ibn Ahmad from the scholars of fiqh from the Maalikis said,

'It is not permissible for the one who consumes tobacco to be an imaam or to take
the position of imaam. Nor is it permissible to trade and do commerce in it or in
what intoxicates.'"

And of the `Ulama of Egypt that made smoking haraam is Shaikh Ahmad
as-Sanhuri alBahuti of the Hanbalis. And the Shaikh of the Maalikis, Ibrahim
al-Laqaani. From the `Ulama of Morocco, Abul Ghaith alQashaash alMaaliki

From the `Ulama of Dimashq (Damascus), an-Najm alGhazi al`Aamiri
ash-Shaafi`ii. From the `Ulama of Yemen, Ibrahim ibn Jam'aan, his student Abu
Bakr alAhdal {Zaidiyyah madhhab, translators note}.

From the `Ulama of the Haramain (Makkah and Madinah), The brilliant scholar of
investigation, `Abdul Maalik al'Aasimi and his student Muhammad ibn `Alaan, the
commentator on Riyaad us-Saalihin and as-Sayyid `Umar alBasri.

And in the lands of the Meditteranean and Turkey, Shaikh Muhammad
alKhawaajah, `Isa ash-Shahaadi alHanafi, Makki ibn Furukh, as-Sayyid Sa'd
alBalakhi alMadani and Muhammad alBarzunji alMadani ash-Shaafi'ii.

I (Muhammad ibn Ibrahim) have seen the one who takes it in the time of dispute,
they (the `Ulama) say to him, "Say, 'La ilaha illallah (NOTE: the reason why the
Hanbalis made the man say the Shahaada is that they classified him as a kaafir for
arguing about something clearly haraam. This should be a warning to those who
debate about it today).'"

Then it is said, "This is hot tobacco!" And all of these are from the `Ulama of the
Ummah, the senior imaams that have given fatwa in that it is haraam and it is
forbidden from {possessing it, translators note} and it is forbidden to take it.

SECONDLY: THE PURE AND UNADULTERATED INTELLECT

So what is known by widespread report and testimonial from what is collected and
put together is that consumption of it in general is harmful to the well-being, body
and intellect.

And death, fainting and difficult sicknesses have already been witnessed, such as
clear and constant coughing due to the sickness of pulmonary tuberculosis,
sicknesses of the heart, death due to the heart stopping and shrinkage of the blood
arteries in the limbs.

Besides that, whatever carries with it intellectual deprivation, taking it is haraam. So
the pure and unadulterated intellect is by necessity the authentic reasons for taking
something are for achieving and attaining from it benefits.

Likewise it is judged to be sound by forbidding, refraining and abstaining from the
causes and things that can cause harm, destroy and in large amounts causing
dissension to someone.

There is no doubt in that for the one who has any sense or intelligence at all. And
there is no lesson, advice or consideration for the one that is turning to likeness and
untamed desire to destroy and harm his intellect.

So he is worshipping it (the desire and the addiction), panting and running after it
with hallucinations, self-deception and delusions and foolish concepts and fantasies
until all that remains is becoming a prisoner to his desire, in opposition to the causes
and reasons for his righteousness and guidance.

ONLY SHARIAH CAN SAVE THEM;
Why Children Are Growing Into Killers

SHARIAH; THE MOST MERCIFUL SOLUTION

As the news is flooded with incidents of people, even children, going on rampages,
we have seen no justice done in this matter.

In reality, what we have seen is more sympathy shown to the murders and those
who did the crime rather than the one that had the crime perpetrated on them.

This sort of blame the victim mentality is only one more brick in the house of
recklessness that these societies have built for themselves. The answer to this
problem lies in punishing those that are pariahs in the society.

But the justice must not be of our own making. Rather, it should be the making of
the Creator who knows what is best for the entire creation.

We intend to discuss a few of the solutions to the problems that exist in the kaafir
society in the West and why they are not being implemented and who stands to
benefit from the absence of the just and balanced system that Allah has revealed.

The first error and great mishap to befall these immoral societies is what they do
about the child that commits the crime of killing. Now there are many incidents
where there are voices calling for human rights and that they cannot put a child on
trial.

To the kuffar, the child stays such until he or she reaches the age of 18 or 21. Until
then, they are classified as juveniles. When they commit a crime, irrespective of
what it may be, they are given soft sentences.

However, in Islam, the child ceases to be a such at the age of 15 or when they
begin to show the signs of womanhood, which would be physical development
and/or the the monthly cycle.

For men, it would be the rough hair that grows on the private areas and the
underarms. Once these criterion are met, then the child is what is called baaligh
(this denotes one who is responsible in the Shari'a).

Thus in the Shari'a, we do not link maturity to chronological numbers or to a set
limit, we link it to the apparent, what can be seen. And what is seen in the Shari'a
are the signs of adulthood.

Far too often in these societies in the West does a 17 year old, who is an adult in
the Shari'a, devise a diabolical plan to kill his or her parents and succeed in
escaping the death penalty only due to the fact that he/she is 17 1/2 years old.

Thus based just on this, even if we see him smiling at the time of doing the crime
and laughing and unrepentant, he is still 'immature' and there is no recompense or
thought about the victims of these menaces to society.

But the Shari'a has the answer to this problem. Let us benefit from what the Shari'a
stands for in this regard,

In regards to the child killing, the `Ulama have said,

'There is ijmaa` of the people of knowledge on that the one who killed by mistake
has to pay expiation equal to that of a man or woman.

'And it is incumbent in the matter of child, adult, and it is necessary that the killing
be announced....and this is the statement of Maalik and ash-Shaafi`ii.' alMughni, V.
9.

Thus indeed, even if the individual was 10 years old at the time of his crime, there
would still be compensation delivered to the victim's family. There would be
something to cool the pain and hurt that is rushing through their hearts. And they
would also be made to know that the parents of that child would be made
responsible.

And how many times do parents in these societies give their children the rope of
freedom so that they might go in the streets and hang someone with it? In the
Shari'a, those in authority, the parents, will indeed answer for what they have done.

It will not simply be a matter of the child being slapped on the wrist and the parents
not being brought to justice for what they created. How was the environment
created at home for that child to come to the conclusion that he did to commit the
act that he did?

Surely, he did not do this act on his own without any stimulus, did he? There are
conditions and an environment that he has to gain influence from in these matters. A
tiger does not learn to merely hunt on its' own. These actions are taught manners.
Therefore, it is the parents, not the child, who will compensate the victim or victims
in this regard.

The child or the insane is not able to confess to the crime himself, for his witness is
not binding, therefore there must be a guardian or someone to assist in establishing
the proof.

There will in some cases be a confirmation taken from the killer though. Please see
Sharh Sahih Muslim by Shaikh ulIslam Imaam an-Nawawi, V. 11, under the
Chapter of the Authenticity of the Admission of Killing and alMughni, V. 10.

And if there was more than one person involved in the accidental killing, then again,
there should still be expiation taken from all the parents involved. The same holds
true for businesses that are negligent.

If there should be unsafe work conditions which results in the death of a person,
then that company, which is made up of several people, must pay compensation to
the next of kin. The Shari'a rule states,

'Whoever shared in the killing, it is necessary that they all share in the expiation.
This is the statement of most of the `Ulama, alHasan, `Ikrimah, an-Nakha`ii,
ath-Thawri, Maalik, ash-Shaafi`ii...And it is related from Ahmad that the expiation
should be one expiation for all of those who took part...'

'The general verse is, "And whoever killed a believer by mistake, then they should
free one believing slave and give a compensation to the family of the deceased,
unless they waive it.

"And whoever does not have the means, then let him fast two consecutive months
to seek the forgiveness of Allah. And Allah is All Knowing, All Wise," Surat
un-Nisaa', ayah 92.

'So there must be qisaas (the law of equality) regarding the matter of killing, for it is
incumbent and compulsory to have expiation for it, like the free, for truly he (the
believing slave) is a believer, so he is like the free (believer). And there is a
difference regarding the animals in that (the law of expiation or equality).

'And it is the same whether the killer is old, a full adult, child, insane, free or slave.'
alMughni, V. 9

So it should be understood in this regard that no one should be excused due to age
or social status in the Shari'a, even due to accidental killing. This is why the
accidental killing, no matter how remorseful the person, still must be compensated.

This in turn, insha'allah, prevents retaliation attacks against the family of the offender
and a lawless society. For if people think that there is no justice, they will turn to
implementing their own justice in order to make matters right.

And this is one of the serious problems plaguing the West. Many people have no
faith in the judicial system so they take the law into their own hands. Many feel that
this is the only option and the only way to guarantee that a wrong will be redressed
and that the lives of their loved ones are not cheap.

In Islam, life is not cheap, which is why those who are negligent with human life are
brought to task. If we look at the Steven Lawrence case, the bloody assassination
of Alex Odeh and the assassination of Malcolm X, we still see that there was no
clear cut justice delivered.

The murderers of Alex Odeh were not only neve brought to trial, but they were left
alone, for MURDER and was deemed justified due to the fact that they were
Jewish and felt threatened by the presence of an Arab.

In the Paddington rail disaster, an incredible amount of human suffering took place.
Not long after came the Hatfield crash, and most recently the crash in Selby, all
located in Britain. Yet no one is willing to take responsibility.

While the families are left to try to dig out the charred remains of their loved ones,
no one responsible has been arrested and made to bear the burden of these
tragedies.

Those in charge merely shrug their shoulders and reply that there is 'nothing they
can do.' Others also have an insurance clause, known as the 'God clause' or the
'act of God clause,' in which they proclaim that their negligence and disaster is
purely an act of God.

How facinating that these people should invoke Allah for their disasters, but not in
prayer, fasting and abstaining from idols, pork and alcohol!

But in the merciful Shari'a, no detail is left neglected. Anyone who desires freedom
will naturally desire the Shari'a, not just for himself, but to save the society.

EVIL IS NOT HONOURED

The next important point is that in the Shari'a, the people of evil are not given the
same footing as those who are the people of righteousness. It is a common feature
in the West that homosexuals and atheists are given equal consideration along with
those who believe in a Lord of heaven and earth.

And due to this they are accorded the same rights. But is this just? Should the
criminals and perverts really have a say in the ruling of the nation or the rights and
priveleges of those who are clean and pure? The Shari'a answer is a resounding
'no.'

And this brings us to our next point regarding the killing of negligence or accident.
The one who does not believe in Allah and is accidently killed by a Muslim has a
seperate reality from the Muslim. If a Muslim is killed by accident, he is accorded
to have expiation payed to his family by the offender.

But the kaafir is given no such provision. This is due to the fact that the Shari'a does
not respect every soul. The person that was killed by accident and is a kaafir in
most cases is not entitled to expiation, as we read below,

Regarding whether a Muslim or a kaafir did the killing, there is a difference. If the
Muslim killed a kaafir that was in covenant with the Islamic state (an actual Islamic
state, not just a country that has Muslims, the government must be ruling with the
complete Shari`a) or a kaafir that is paying jizya, then he must pay the blood
money.

So one who has submitted to the Islamic state from amongst the kuffar is entitled to
some benefit, for he is paying jizya and bearing witness that Islam is the discipline
ruling the state.

For this individual, there is a diyah (expiation) that should be payed on his behalf.

The Muslim may not be killed under any circumstances, as the Prophet (SAW)
said in a hadith from Bukhaari, 'A Muslim should not be killed for the sake of a
kaafir.'

A Muslims should never in any case be killed by a kaafir even if he had killed one,
whether it was a kaafir in covenant with the Islamic state or not.

This has to do with the statement of the Prophet (SAW) in which he said,

'The intellect of the people of the covenant (Jews and Christians) is half of that of
the Muslims,' Collected by Imaam as-Suyuti in Sahih ulJaami'a and classifed as
sahih.

He should therefore pay an expiation which is half of that of a free Muslim.
Therefore, what he would have to give to the family of a free Muslim he would
have to give half of that to the kaafir family as a recompense.

If a Muslim killed a kaafir that did not belong to one of the above categories, then
he (the Muslim) should not pay expiation, i.e. blood money. Please see alMughni,
V. 10 from Mas'ala # 7,003 on.

This is due to the fact that there is no treaty between the parties. And if there is no
treaty, that means that the forces of darkness have not been subdued. The type of
people that have not been subdued are the child molesters, race bigots, rapists,
cannibals and all of these disgusting elements of Western society that are manifest
now.

Once these people submit and are put in line, then we can find who are the people
that believe in the previous revelations and establish a rapport with them
accordingly.

But before them, we have to fight them, due to the fact that the Shari'a of
Muhammad (SAW) is the most complete and their laws, not only are they
corrupted, but also abrogated. Therefore, all people are to either enter Islam or
submit to Islam as the dominant discipline and way of ruling.

Someone might be wondering how will expiation help the family of someone who
has been murdered. We must say to the questioner that this is a different issue. The
one that we had been making reference to before is the case of the one who was
killed through negligence or by accident.

Murders with purposeful intent fall under an entire different section.

In regards to premeditated murder, please read on,

Shaikh Shams ud-Din Ibn Qudaamah (RH) says,

"It is well known and famous in the madhhab (the Hanbali madhhab) that there is
no expiation in premeditated murder. And in a quasi-deliberate murder [in other
words, a death that was suspicious or dubious, my note], our Shaikh (Imaam
Ahmad) says that expiation (blood money) is necessary," alMughni, V. 10

And this is all in line and matching with what Allah said,

"And whoever killed a believer intentionally, then his reward is the Fire forever and
the wrath and curse of Allah is upon him. And an immense punishment has been
prepared for him," Surat un-Nisaa,' ayah 93.

Thus, there is no blood money given to expiate the person that had murdered, for
the murderer in the Shari'a is to be sent to his Lord. He is to be killed.

This has to do with the hadith of the Prophet (SAW) in which he said,

'The blood of the Muslim is haraam (preserved from being killed) except in one of
3 cases, (1) kufr after imaan, (2) adultery after chastity (3) or killing a soul without
right (murder),' collected by imaams alBukhaari and Muslim and agreed upon.

It would be a different story if the person was negligent and he had killed someone
by accident. But this man or woman who killed with purposeful intent must be
made an example.

They should not be left to wander around and seek revenge from the family who
helped put them behind bars. The way of the Shaafi'iis is actually to publicise and
announce who did the murder once it is established.

This will humiliate and expose the murderer to the people. It also de-glamourises
the murderer. They see that there will be no glamourous court case on deciding
what to do with him. There will be no fancy solicitors with suits parading around
and thinking up plea bargains.

There will simply be an execution on Friday after Jumu'ah prayer and the people
will be able to walk the streets safely.

If the murder can't be proven with witnesses and the one denying still appears
suspicious, then the expiation then becomes due according to the statement of
Shaikh Ibn Qudaamah (RH) above. This is due to the fact that the circumstances
were dubious surrounding the death.

Thus if he did commit the crime and thinks he is safe, he indeed did have to pay
expiation and he is being watched. He is also not safe from Allah (SWT), who will
either expose him in this life or punish him severely on the Day of Resurrection.
And if he did not murder, infact, the blood money has already been exacted for his
negligence in the matter.

Therefore, from either standpoint, the Shari'a has proven to be the most merciful
and the most comprehensive in solving the problems that plague the human race.

But as long as we continue to ignore what Allah has sent down as revelation to His
slaves, the chaos that is far too often present in these societies will continue. It does
not have to remain this way, but those in power intend to try to keep it that way.

Corruption beings profit to some, but justice and the laws of Allah bring justice and
happiness to the masses as a whole. And may Allah hasten its' re-implementation.

RULING BY OTHER THAN WHAT ALLAH REVEALED;
Tauheed Al-Hakkimyah

"And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, then such are the
disbelievers." 5:44

Ibn Taymiyyah (RH) said about this verse:

"There is no doubt that whoever does not believe in the obligation to rule according
the Revelation of ALlah is a kaafir (disbeliever). Whoever permits himself to rule
people according to what he thinks is just without reference to the Revelation of
Allah is a kaafir. Indeed there is no nation which does not demand to be ruled with
justice, but justice is is contained in the 'Deen' and not in the opionion of even the
greatest leaders. It is true that many who have styled themselves Muslims rule by
their traditions which are not part of the Revelation, such was the case with the
Desert Arabs whose chiefs demanded obedience and were of the opinion that one
should rule by tradition rather than by the Bok and the Sunnah. This is kufr.
Although many submit to Islam, they continue to be ruled by the ancient practice
which their rulers impose upon them. These rulers are told that it is not permitted
for them to rule other than by Revelation of Allah and still they refuse, insisting upon
a course which is at variance to the Revelation of Allah. They are considered
disbelievers."

There are a group of individuals who have taken shahaada and sworn to Allah,
reconfirm it each time they make salah and bow in sajuud, who have obviously
fallen into tradition. They remark that we should not Muslims should not go against
the leaders, because they pray. And as long as they pray, they are still Muslims.
However, they have forgotten the verse that has ruled against these leaders for
refusing to rule by Quran and Sunnah in totality. It should not be the issue of the
time that these people like King Fahd, Abdullah of Jordan, Asad of Syria,
Mubarak of Egypt, and the others who violate all of the rules of Shariah in order to
protect their status, that they are disbelievers. It is simple enough to fight them and
return the judgment over us to Allah, rather than the Taghut.

Ruling by anything other than what Allah has revealed and what His Ta'aala Rasool
has demonstrated by words and deeds, is kufr. When Ibn Abbas was asked
regarding the verse "Whoever does not rule by what Allah has sent downm then
they are the disbelievers," he said, "It is enough kufr."

This meant that it is a big kufr which cannot mean this issue is a small issue. The
rulers ruling today must be fought and returned to ruling by what Allah has revealed
or they must be killed and the land returned to the Believers.

FINAL NOTE
What Do We Want?

This publication is not aimed at separating or causing too much debate among sincere Muslims. Without news from truthful sources, the only alternative is to take from our enemies; those who enjoin falsehood and forbid truth. Insha'llah, our aim is to provide Islamic education, news and discussion to incite the believers into action. We are working toward the sincere education of Muslims, while continuing to learn and champion the way of the Prophet (SAW) and those Rightly Guided (RAA).

How can you help?

By telling others about this website and helping to distribute this information. Encourage Muslims to ask questions and participate on our discussion board. In addition, be patient with us when we are revising and preparing new content. Get the word out in your community that we are not funded by anyone other than Allah -- alhamdulillah. Thus, our opinions come from our understanding of the opinions of the Siddiqun, not from government scholars, evil rulers, and kuffar.

Finally, make continious du`aa for the Mujaahidin and the Ummah that Allah grant all of us victory and reward.

BACK TO AL-JIHAAD