Concepts

CONCEPTS
OF
HIZB UT-TAHRIR
Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 1

Introduction
Since the middle of the twelfth century A.H (eighteenth century AD.) the Islamic world has
rapidly declining from the level it should be and has sunk horribly to the abyss of decline.
Despite numerous attempts undertaken to revive it, or at least to halt its continued decline, no
single attempt has succeeded. The Islamic world remained fumbling in a state of gloom anarchy
and decline, and it still suffers the pains of such backwardness and confusion.
As for the reason for its decline, it is due to a single factor, that is, the mighty weakness which
overtook the minds in understanding Islam. The cause for this feebleness was the detachment of
the power of Arabic from the power of Islam when the Arabic language was ignored both in
understanding and carrying Islam from the beginning of the seventh century A.H. Accordingly,
unless the power of Arabic is mixed with the power of Islam by making the Arabic language,
which is the language of Islam, as an essential and undetached part of it, the decline will continue
to take the Muslims down. Because it is the linguistic power that carried the power of Islam and
consequently intermingled with it, such that the perfect carrying of Islam cannot be undertaken
except by it and because if it is neglected, Ijtihad (deriving of Ahkam from texts) in Shari’ah
(divine law) will remain unfulfilled. Ijtihad in Shari’ah can not be made except in Arabic because
it is a basic condition for performing it, for Ijtihad is necessary for the Ummah since progress in
the Ummah cannot occur except through it.
Reason for the Failure to Achieve Revival
As for the reasons which have caused the failure of these attempts to revive the Muslims with
Islam, it is due to three factors: The first is the lack of an accurate understanding of the Islamic
thought by those who assumed the burden of revival. The second factor is the lack of clarity and
comprehension of the method of implementing the Islamic thought. Thirdly was their failure to
link the Islamic thought with the Islamic method as indetachable unit that cannot be separated.
With regard to the thought, many shallow factors overcame it, causing the Muslims to lose its
clear details. Such factors began from the start of the second century A.H until the arrival of
imperialism. Foreign philosophies, such as the Indian, Persian and Greek had an impact on some
Muslims, inducing them to commit attempts to reconcile between Islam and these philosophies,
despite the complete contradiction between the two. These conciliatory attempts led to wrong
interpretations and explanations that alienated some Islamic facts from the minds or at least
weakened their comprehension. Moreover, some individuals, who harboured ill feeling towards
Islam, embraced it hypocritically and began introducing concepts strange to Islam and even
contradicting it. This led to an erroneous understanding of Islam by many Muslims. Added to this
in the seventh century A.H, was the negligence of the Arabic language in presenting Islam. All of
these factors announced the decline of Muslims. Moreover, since the end of the eleventh century
A.H (seventeenth century AD.) and up to now, the Muslim world has been subjected to cultural
and missionary invasions followed by the political invasion of the West, which added insult to
injury and made things more complicated in the Islamic society. All this had an effective
influence on the Muslims erroneous conception of the Islamic thought, so that it lost its clarity in
the minds.
With regard to the Islamic method, Muslims gradually lost the clarity of its conception. Thus,
after they had realised that their existence in life was for the sake of Islam, that the Muslims duty
in life is to carry the call of Islam, that the duty of the Islamic state is implementing Islam and
executing its rules internally and carrying the call for it externally, and that the method for this is,

performed by the state - Though cognisant of that - began viewing that the main duty of Muslims
was to acquire life primarily, and propagation and giving guidance whenever the conditions
permitted secondly. The state began to see no fault or sin in its complacency over executing
Islamic rules, and did not see any shame in leaving jihad for the sake of Allah to spread Islam.
Muslims after they lost their state - despite its weakness and shortcomings - began to see the
resumption of Islamic way of Life in building mosques, publishing books and educating morals
whilst they kept silent over the domination of kufr on them and about its colonisation.
This is in respect of the thought and the method, but with regard to their binding together
Muslims became devoted to the study the Ahkam Shari’yah related to treatment of the problems,
i.e. related to the thought, and did not devote their attention to the rules that demonstrate the
manner of the treatment, i.e. demonstrate the method. Thus, they studied the rules detached from
their method of execution. They also concentrated on studying the rules of prayer and fasting,
marriage and divorce, and they neglected to study the rules of jihad and al-Ghanaim (spoils),
Khilafah and the judiciary, land taxation (al Kharaj) and the like. Hence they detached the
thought from the method, which resulted in the thought being characterised as impractical.
Other Reasons in the 19th Century
At the end of the 13th century A.H (19th century AD.) the misunderstanding of the Islamic
Shari’ah and its application on the society was added. Islam was interpreted in meanings
incompatible with its texts in order to adapt to the present society; although what was required
was to change the society to adapt with Islam, not to attempt to interpret Islam to adapt with
society. For the problem was the corruption of society which needed to be reformed by a
doctrine, so accordingly the doctrine had to be applied as it is, while it was the society that had to
be changed completely and radically on the basis of this doctrine. Thus, it was necessary for the
reformers to apply the Islamic rules as such, regardless of society, era, time or place. They
however didn’t do this, rather they misinterpreted the Islamic rules to adapt to contemporary life.
They exaggerated in this error in the general and detailed principles. They derived general
principles and detailed rules that agreed with this viewpoint. Thus, they established numerous
erroneous general principles, such as: "It is not prohibited to change the rules according to the
changing of the time", and like "Tradition is the arbitrator" etc. They issued fatwas without a
support from Shari’ah, and even some contradicting the definite Qur'anic text. Hence, they
permitted a little usury on the pretext that it is not multiple, and by the excuse of its necessity for
the funds of the minor (qassir). The judge who is called a Shari’ah judge came to judge with
usury on the orphans deposits. And the judge, whom they called the statuary judge also ruled
with usury. They gave fatwa to suspend Hudood (penal code) and allowed the penal code to be
taken from a source other Islam. Thus, they established rules contradicting Shari’ah by the
excuse that these are more adapted to contemporary life, and out of the necessity that Islam suits
every age, time and place. This resulted in the isolation of Islam from life. Enemies of Islam used
this erroneous comprehension and these false rules as a means to introduce these laws and
principles to Muslims who did not see any contradiction with their religion, due to what
concentrated in their minds on the basis of this erroneous comprehension that Islam suits every
time and place. Moulding Islam by many to suit every school of thought, doctrine, incident and
every principle - even if the interpretation disagreed with the doctrine of Islam and its viewpoint
- became prevalent. This led to the isolation of Islam from life and consequently, the failure of
every reformist movement proceeding according to this erroneous, sick comprehension was an
inevitable matter.

Reasons in the 20th Century
In the beginning of the 20th century AD. a further difficulty was added to the above-mentioned
difficulties which strengthened the obstacles between Islam and life. This increased the already
existent difficulties that faced the Islamic movements; namely, Muslims, and in particular the
scholars (ulema) and the educated people, were characterised by three things:
Firstly, they studied Islam in a way different from the method of study required to understand it.
Islam's method of study is to study the Shari’ah rules as practical questions for application by the
state in what concerns it, and by the individual in his affairs as an individual. Therefore, scholars
(ulema) defined jurisprudence (fiqh) as being the “knowledge of the practical Shari’ah matters
that are derived from their elaborated evidences (adillah al Tafsiliyyah)”. Such a study would
produce knowledge for the student, and action for the society by both the state and the individual.
However, the scholars and educated people, even most Muslims, studied Islam for the purpose of
mere theoretical knowledge as if it were a fanciful philosophy. Through this the jurisprudence
rules (Ahkam) became hypothetical and impractical, and Shari’ah came to be studied as spiritual
and ethical matters, and not as rules to treat the problems of life. This is as far as the study is
concerned, as to the call for Islam, only the way of preaching and guidance, followed by the
missionaries, was transparent but not the method of study which Islam requires. Thus, the people
who learned Islam became either inanimate scholars (ulema), or guiding preachers who repeat to
the people, the boring sermons (khutba), without producing any effect in the society. They did
not understand the meaning of culturing with Islam, that means teaching Muslims the matters of
their Deen in a way that produces an effect in their feelings, and frightens them of the
punishment and wrath of Allah, so that a Muslim becomes a dynamic vitality when his feelings
are connected to his mind, as a result of learning the verses of Allah and the method of its
teaching. Indeed, they understood none of this, and they replaced this deep effective method of
teaching by the method of “preaching and guidance”, which is confined to the shallow common
sermons (khutba). Due to this, people perceived that there was a whole or semi-contradiction,
between the way the problems of society are addressed and Islam, and this required a
reconciliation. Consequently it became common among people to interpret Islam in a way to
make it adapt to the contemporary life.
In addition to this, they misunderstood the speech of Allah, the Supreme, “And the believers
should not all go out to fight. Of every troop of them, a party only should go forth, that they (who
are left behind) may gain sound knowledge in the Deen and that they warn their folk when they
return to them, so that they may beware.”
They interpreted this Ayah to mean that some people of each group should set off to acquire
knowledge (or to seek it) and to return to their people to teach them. Through this, they made
learning of the Deen fard kifaya i.e. a collective duty, thus conflicting with hukm Shar’i and the
meaning of the Ayah.
As for the Hukm Shar’i, it is an obligation on every sane adult Muslim to acquire knowledge
from Islam covering the matters of his daily life. This is because he is commanded to perform all
his actions based upon the commands and the prohibitions of Allah (SWT). There is no way to
fulfil this except through the knowledge of Ahkam Shari’ah related to his actions. Therefore,
acquiring comprehensive knowledge in the Deen about the rules necessary for Muslims for daily
life is an obligation for each individual (fard ayn) not a collective duty (fard kifaya). Where as
Ijtihad, to derive Ahkam is a collective obligation. As for their contradiction to the meaning of
this Ayah, the verse is about jihad, which means that Muslims should not all go out to jihad.
When a group set out for jihad another group should remain to learn the rules (Ahkam) at the
hands of the Messenger (SAW), so that when the mujahideen returned back, those who remained

would teach them what they had missed of the rules of Allah in a way that would produce an
effect in them. This is denoted by the example of the companions (r), who were so careful to
learn the rules (Ahkam) of the Deen, and to be in the company of the Messenger (SAW). Some
of them would set out on an expedition for jihad, and some would remain behind to learn the
rules of the Deen. When the mujahideen returned, those who remained would teach them the
rules they had missed.
Secondly, the malicious West, hateful of Islam and the Muslims, attacked the Deen of Islam,
defamed it, fabricated lies against it on the one hand and denounced some of its rules on the
other, despite the fact that those rules advance the affairs of life in society in a correct manner.
So Muslims, particularly the educated, were very weak in the face of this attack. Subsequently
they accepted Islam to be accused and became defensive, a matter which caused them to make
attempts to interpret the rules of Islam wrongly. For example they interpreted jihad as a defensive
rather than an offensive war. They contradicted the reality of jihad, for jihad is a war against
anyone who stands in the face of the Islamic Dawah, whether he is an aggressor or not. In other
words, it is the removal by force of any obstacle standing in the face of the Dawah, i.e. the call to
Islam, and the fight for its sake; for the sake of Allah. When Muslims conducted Jihad against
Persia, the Byzans, Egypt, North Africa, Andalus and others, they did so because the dawa
required them to make jihad to propagate it in these countries. However, the above erroneous
interpretation of jihad resulted from the weakness of not accepting Islam to be accused, and from
defending it in a way that satisfied the accuser. Similar to this is the question of polygamy, the
question of cutting the thief's hand and other questions which Muslims tried to respond to the
disbelievers. They tried to interpret Islam in meanings that contradict it. Accordingly, Muslims
were alienated from understanding Islam which was subsequently removed from practise.
Thirdly, due to the receding patronage of the Islamic state from many of the Islamic countries
and its subjection to the authority of kufr and later due to the collapse of the Islamic state and its
termination, the existence of the Islamic state in the minds of many Muslims became improbable,
as was the improbability of ruling with Islam alone. Therefore, they came to accept to be
governed by other than what Allah had revealed. They did not see any harm in this as long as the
name of Islam was kept, though ther was no ruling by it. They called for the obligation of
utilising the other schools of thought (mazhabs) and doctrines to enable the application of Islam
in life's affairs. This resulted in the refrain from the action to restore the Islamic state and the
silence about the application of the rules of kufr on Muslims by their own hands.
Accordingly, all the reformist movements which were established to revive Muslims and to
restore the glory of Islam failed. It was natural for such movements to fail, because though they
were Islamic movements, they nevertheless contributed to the fortification of the problem they
increased the complexity and complicated the problem, distancing the society from Islam instead
of working to implement it due to its misunderstanding.
Therefore, it was necessary to have an Islamic movement, that understands Islam as a thought
and a method, to connect between them, and to act to resume the Islamic way of life in any of the
parts of the Islamic world, so that this part becomes a starting point, from which the Islamic call
springs out, then becomes a launching (departure) point for the call to Islam.

Establishment of Hizb ut-Tahrir
On this basis the Liberation party (Hizb ut-Tahrir) was established, and started to work for the
resumption of the Islamic way of life in the Arab lands, from which will result naturally the
resumption of the Islamic way of life in all the Islamic World by establishing the Islamic state in
one or more of its parts as a support point for Islam, and as a nucleus for the great Islamic state,
which resumes the Islamic way of life, by the application of Islam completely in all Islamic
lands, and conveys the Islamic call to the whole world.
After study, thought and research Hizb ut-Tahrir adopted rules (Ahkam Shari’ah), some of which
relate to the treatment of the individual problems which occur among individuals and in their
relations with each other, such as the prohibition of leasing land for farming. Some are relevant
to the general opinions that are prevalent among Muslims and others, and others related with the
relationship of all Muslims with others, such as the permissibility of concluding extraordinary
treaties due to Idtirar (Mu’ahida idtirariyyah) of emergency and the call for Islam before starting
the fight etc. Some are related to the thoughts, which are the rules (Ahkam Shari’ah) like the
generally known rules such as the comprehensive principles and the definitions, like for example,
the principle which says: “That which is necessary to accomplish a duty (wajib) is itself a duty
(wajib)”, and the definition of the rule (hukm Shar’i) being the address of the Legislator related
to man's actions etc. The party has adopted in every category certain rules, and started advocating
them in the process of resuming the Islamic way of life. These are merely Islamic opinions,
thoughts and rules, none of which is non-Islamic, nor affected by any non-Islamic thing, they are
purely Islamic, depending only on Islamic sources and texts. The party, when adopting them,
depends on the thought, and considers the call for Islam to be based on thought, and that it should
be delivered as an intellectual leadership. It is on the enlightened thought that life is based and
man ascends. It shows the reality of things and issues in a way enabling their correct
comprehension. Thought should be deep and things and issues are viewed as such. Hence; the
enlightened thought is the deep view of things, their conditions and everything which is related
through which correct results are obtained. In other words it is the deep enlightened look towards
things and issues. Therefore, it is necessary to have a deep enlightened view about the universe,
man and life, and about man and his actions, so as to understand the rules resulting from them.
The deep enlightened thought about the universe, man and life, produces the comprehensive
thought about them. It resolves the greatest problem of man, defining for him the purpose of life,
and the objective of the actions which he practices in life, for man lives in the universe; and
unless the greatest problem about himself, the life existent in him, and the universe, which is the
location of his life and his existence is solved, he will not be able to know the manner in which
he has to behave. Hence, the Aqeeda is the basis of everything.
The deep enlightened thought about the universe, man and life, leads to the Islamic Aqueeda,
accordingly it expounds clearly that they are created by a Creator, and this Creator is He alone
who directs them, preserves them and guides them according to a specific system; and that this
earthly life is not eternal nor everlasting. Hence, before this life there is the Creator as sovereign,
and then there is the day of Judgement after this life. Consequently, Man's actions in this life
must proceed in accordance with the commands and prohibitions of Allah, and man will be
questioned about them on the day of judgement. Therefore, it is compulsory on man to abide by
the Shari’ah of Allah which the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (saw), has conveyed to him (to
man).

Matter
The deep enlightened observation of the universe, man and life, shows that they are only material
and not spirit, nor composed of material and spirit. By material we mean the comprehended
tangible thing, whether the material is defined as that which occupies a space and has a weight,
or defined as the overt or covert charged energy be it visible or not, for the discussion is not
about the nature of the material, but rather about the universe, life and man - these tangible
comprehended things - of being created by a Creator. By spirit we mean the realisation of the
relationship with Allah, and not the “secret of life”, because the discussion is not about the spirit
in the sense of life's secret, rather it is about the relationship of the universe, man and life with
the unseen, i.e. with the Creator, and the realisation of this relationship, i.e. the realisation of the
relationship of the universe, man and life to their Creator, being a part of them or not?
As a matter of fact the deep enlightened view of the universe, man and life - in regard of the
sense of the spirit as being the realisation of the relationship with Allah, not in regard of the spirit
as being the secret of life - reveals that they are material only, not spirit, nor composed of
material and spirit. Being material, this is visible and not concealed, because it is comprehended
and tangible. As for not being a spirit, this is because the spirit is man's realisation of the
relationship with his Creator. This realisation of man of his relationship with Allah is neither the
universe, nor man nor life, rather it is different from them. As for not being composed of material
and spirit, this is clear in the universe and life. As for man, his realisation of his relationship with
Allah is not part of his structure, but an extraneous attribute, with the evidence that the
unbeliever denying the existence of Allah does not realise his relationship with Allah even
though he is a human being.
Accordingly, what some people claim, that man is composed of material and spirit, and if the
material in him dominates over the spirit he would become evil, and if the spirit in him
dominates over the material he would become good; that he has to give priority for the spirit over
the material in order to become good is incorrect. Man is not composed of material and spirit,
because the spirit discussed in this chapter in view of all people who believe in the existence of a
God is the sign of the Creator, or what is witnessed of the signs of the unseen, or realising a
matter in the thing which cannot exist save by Allah or the like i.e. the sense of spirituality or the
spiritual aspect. The spirit in the sense of spirituality or the spiritual aspect existent in man is
neither the secret of life nor emanating thereof, or being related to it. It is completely different to
that, with the evidence that an animal has the secret of life even though it has no spirituality or
spiritual aspect. Furthermore, nobody claims that an animal is composed of material and spirit,
the fact which confirms definitely that the spirit, in this context, is not the secret of life, nor
resulting from the secret of life, and it has no relationship with the secret of life. As the animal is
not composed of material and spirit though it has the secret of life, man is likewise, because “the
spirit” by which man is distinguished, and which he possesses, is not connected with the secret of
life nor emanating from it, rather it is the realisation of the relationship with Allah. Accordingly
it is not true to say that spirit is a part of man's structure, just because man has in himself the
secret of life.
Since spirit discussed in this context is the realisation of man's relationship with Allah and has no
relationship with the secret of life, it cannot be a part of man's structure, because the realisation
of this relationship is not a part of his structure, but rather an extraneous attribute, with the
evidence being that the non-believer who denies the existence of Allah, does not realise his
relationship with Allah, even though he is a human being.

Although the universe, man and life are material and not spirit, they do have a spiritual aspect in
them; which is that they are created by a Creator i.e. by Allah, the Supreme, their Creator. That
is, the universe is material, and being created by a Creator is the spiritual aspect which man
realises. Likewise, Man is material, and being created by a Creator is the spiritual aspect which
man realises. Thus, the spiritual aspect does not result from the universe, man and life
themselves, but from their being created by a Creator, by Allah, the Supreme. This relationship is
the “spiritual aspect”.
Spirit, Spirituality and Spiritual Aspect
The name of spirit and its meaning came about when people who believe in the existence of God
frequently use the words of the spirit, spirituality, and the spiritual aspect, bearing in mind what
they realised about the effect of the creator on the existence, meaning by them the sign of the
Creator in the locality, or what is witnessed of signs of the unseen, or the realisation of the thing
which can not exist save by Allah, or the like. These terms, spirit, spirituality and the spiritual
aspect and that which has a similar meaning, are unspecified, ambiguous and obscure. They have
a reality in their mind, and a reality outside their mind, which is the unseen whose existence is
realised and whose entity (identity) is not, and the indication of this unseen in things. However,
this reality which they sense and their senses fall upon cannot be defined by them nor is it clear
for them. Due to the ambiguity of these meanings, their conception of these terms was confused.
To some of them it became mixed with the spirit which is the secret of life and due to their sense
of the existence of spirit in man, which is the secret of life as well as the existence of spirituality
and spiritual aspect they came to say that man is composed of spirit and material. Hence, they got
confused between the two meanings spirit being in both cases the same, or the one resulting from
the other, and they did not turn their attention to the fact that the animal has a spirit i.e. the secret
of life but it has neither spirituality nor the spiritual aspect. Moreover due to this ambiguity, the
psychological tranquillity, became called spirituality. The individual would then say about
himself that he felt a remarkable spirituality or that a certain person had a great spirituality. Also
due to its ambiguity, a person would enter a place and feel a delightful ease, he would describe a
place as having a spiritual aspect or spirituality. And because of its ambiguity, a person would
starve himself, torment and weaken his body claiming that he wanted to strengthen his spirit. All
this as a result of the ambiguity of the meaning of the spirit, spirituality and the spiritual aspect.
A similar confusion occurred in the part when people tried to conceive the reality of the
“intellect” or “reason”. Reason is a connotation which means the comprehension and judgement
upon a thing etc. But those of ancient times perceived comprehension and the like, as effects of
“reason”, not the reason itself. The mind in their view had a reality, which they felt, but were
unable to ascertain and accordingly was ambiguous to them. As a result of this ambiguity their
perception of it differed, their perception of its location and their comprehension of its reality
became more confused. Some of them claimed that it was located in the heart, to others it was in
the head, to others it was in the brain, whilst another group held different opinions. In recent
times some thinkers have proceeded to identify the meaning of the mind and define it, but they in
turn failed to comprehend its reality and were confused: some of them said it is the reflection of
material on the brain, while others claimed it is the reflection of brain on the material. A correct
definition was by the end elaborated by defining “reason” as the process of the transmission of
the reality to the brain via the senses with the existence of precedent information through which
this reality is interpreted (or understood). By this definition, the true nature of the “mind” or
reason is correctly comprehended. Likewise it is necessary that some thinkers act to clarify the
meaning of spirit, spirituality and the spiritual aspect in order to be understood in a correct
manner. It is witnessed and sensed by man that there are materialistic (tangible) things which

man senses and touches, such as a loaf of bread, and others that he may sense but does not touch,
such as the service rendered by a doctor. There are moral things that man senses but does not
touch such as pride and praise; or are spiritual things which man senses but does not touch, such
as the fear of Allah and the submission to him upon the calamities. These are three meanings
based on reality and, sensed by man, and each is differing from the other. Accordingly, the spirit
or the spiritual aspect or the spirituality is a specified reality, felt by the senses. it is then
necessary to define this reality to crystallise it, as the mind was defined and crystallised.
A close examination of the reality of the spirit, the spirituality and the spiritual aspect, reveals
that they are not existent in the atheist who denies the existence of Allah, but only in those who
believe in the existence of a God. This means that they are related to the belief in Allah,
whenever the faith exists and vanish whenever the faith is absent. Belief in the existence of Allah
means the conclusive conviction that things are created by a Creator, who definitely created
them. Thus, the subject of discussion is that things are created by a Creator and the
acknowledgement that they are created by a Creator is belief, and the denial that they are created
by a Creator is kufr (disbelief). Once acknowledgement and definite belief is established the
spiritual aspect is found for the belief brought it into existence. In case of non-acknowledgement
and denial, the spiritual aspect does not exist, for denial made it non-existent. Accordingly, the
spiritual aspect means that things are created by a Creator, i.e. the relationship of things to their
Creator in respect of creation out of nothing. If the mind comprehends that relationship of the
things being created by a Creator, it then feels an appreciation of the might of the Creator, fear
and venerate Him. So the realisation of this relationship which yields such a feeling is the
spirituality. Thus, the spirit is the realisation of the relationship with Allah and the meaning of
the spiritual aspect is identified. Spiritual aspect and the spirit are not merely terms that have
linguistic connotations for which references are made to linguistics, nor are they technical terms,
set up by different people to mean different things but they are expressions which have a precise
reality regardless of whatever terms they are given. So the discussion is about the reality of these
meanings, not about the meaning of certain linguistic words. The reality of these expressions is
that the spirit, in respect to the spiritual aspect in man, is the realisation of the relationship with
Allah; and the spiritual aspect in the universe, man and life is the fact of being created by a
Creator. Wherever these terms are mentioned, they indicate these meanings because it is these
meanings that have a sensed reality which can be proved. This sensed reality is their rational and
external manifestation to the people believing in God, i.e. in the existence of a Creator of things.
As for the spirit in which is the secret of life, it is definitely existent, and confirmed in the
definite Qur'anic texts, we must believe in it, and it is not the subject of this discussion.
The term of spirit “Rooh” is a common term like the word 'ein' in Arabic - a word having more
than one meaning-, many things such as the water source, the eye, the spy, gold, silver and
others. The spirit came in the Qur'an with numerous meanings, such as the secret of life:
"They will ask you concerning the spirit ; say: the spirit is by command of my Lord, and
knowledge you have been vouchsafed but little." (Isra'a 85)
Or as Gibreel (peace be upon him);

"Which the true spirit have brought down. Upon your heart, that you be (one) of the warners."
(The Poets 193-194)
Or as the law of Allah, Shari’ah;

"And thus have We inspired in you (Mohammed) a spirit of our command." (Shura 52)

All those meanings have nothing to do with a “spiritual aspect”, or a “spiritual thing”, or
detachment of the material from the spirit etc. There is no relationship between this statement
about the spirit and the meanings of the spirit mentioned in the Qur'an. What is meant by the
spirit in the meaning explained earlier is the meaning related to the creation of the material, i.e.
in respect of things being created by a Creator who is Allah, the Supreme, and man's realisation
of the relationship of things with their Creator.
Al Qada Wal Qadar
The deep enlightened view of man reveals that he lives in two spheres: one of them dominates
him, and the other he dominates. In regard of that which dominates him, it is the sphere in which
the natural laws of the universe apply on him. So he, the universe and life proceed according to a
certain system which does not slacken. Therefore, actions in this sphere fall upon him without his
will; he is controlled without choice. So he came to this world without his will, and he will leave
it without his will, and he cannot divert from the system of the universe. Therefore, he is not
questioned about the actions which occur from him or upon him in this sphere. As for the sphere
which he dominates, it is the sphere in which he proceeds freely within the system he chooses,
whether it is the law (Shari’ah) of Allah or any other. In this sphere the actions occur from man;
or upon him, according to his will, thus he walks, eats, drinks, and travels any time he likes and
abstains from that any time he likes. He acts and abstains freely, and will therefore be questioned
about his actions within this sphere.
Man likes some things which occur from him or upon him in the sphere which he dominates and
the sphere which dominates him, and dislikes some things in the two spheres, so he tries to
interpret his liking and disliking as khair and sharr, and he inclines to calling what he likes as
khair, and what he dislikes as sharr. Also, he calls some actions as khair and some actions as
sharr according to the benefit he gets from them and the harm they inflict upon him.
In reality is that the actions which occur from man in this sphere are not described as khair or
sharr as such (or for their sake), because they are but actions only, having no innate quality of
khair or sharr. This case of being khair or sharr occurs due to factors separate from the nature of
the actions. Thus, killing a human being is not called khair or sharr, it is only called killing, but
its being khair or sharr comes from a qualification external to it. Therefore, killing a enemy
fighter at war is khair, and killing a citizen, an individual protected by an agreement or an asylum
seeker is sharr. So the first person performing the killing is rewarded and the second is punished,
though they have both performed the same action without differentiation. Khair and sharr result
from the factors which drive man to undertake the action and from the goal which he pursues in
doing the action. So the factors which drive man to act, and the goal which he pursues, are that
which assess the quality of the action as khair and sharr, whether man likes the action or dislikes
it , and whether he gets benefit or harm from it.
Accordingly, it is necessary to scrutinise the factors which drive man to practise an action, and to
discuss the goal he pursues, to appropriately comprehend when the action is described as khair or
sharr. The knowledge of the driving factors and the goal which is sought depends on the type of
doctrine (Aqeeda) in which man believes. Thus, a Muslim who believes in Allah and believes
that He sent our master Mohammed (SAW) with the law (Shari’ah) of Islam which expounds the
commands and prohibitions of Allah, and organises his relationship with his Creator, with
himself and with others, this Muslim must be directed in his actions by the commands and
prohibitions of Allah, and the goal which he seeks from this is attaining the pleasure of Allah.

Therefore, an action is described as angering Allah or pleasing Him. If it is of that which angers
Allah, because it disagrees with His commands or it violates His prohibitions, it would be sharr;
and if it was of that which pleases Allah, by obeying His commands and avoiding His
prohibitions, it would be khair.
Hence we can say: khair, from the viewpoint of a Muslim, is that which pleases Allah, and sharr
is that which angers Him.
This applies to the actions which occur by man or upon him in the sphere which he dominates.
But in regard to the actions which occur from man or upon him in the sphere which dominates
him, man describes them as khair or sharr according to his like or dislike, benefit or harm.
"Lo! man was created anxious, fretful when evil befalleth him and when good befalleth him,
grudging." (The Ascending Stairways 19-21)
"And lo! in the love of good (wealth) he is enthusiastic." (The Earthquake 8)
But this description does not mean a description of its reality, because he may see something as
khair while it is sharr, and he may see it as sharr while it is khair.
"But it may happen that you hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that you love
a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth and you know not." (Bakara: 216)
Husn and Qubh.
A deep enlightened view of man's actions, aside from all matters and close associations, reveals
that they are only material. Being material they are not characterised with husn or qubh in
themselves but they are described as such because of external close associations and
considerations entailing from other things. This other thing, which determines that the action is
husn or qubh, (1) is either the mind alone, (2) the Islamic law (Shari’ah) alone, or the mind and
the Shari’ah as a proof for judgement, or the Shari’ah and the mind as a proof for judgement.
Determining the actions by the mind alone it is false, because the intellect is subject to disparity,
difference and contradiction, that is, the mind's evaluation of husn or qubh is affected by the
environment in which the mind lives, and even becomes disparate and differs with the succession
of ages. So if the evaluation of husn and qubh was left to the intellect, the thing would be qubh
for one group of people and husn for others, but even the same thing could be husn in one age
and qubh in another. Islam, as the everlasting and universal ideology, determines that the
description of actions as qubh and husn should be valid for all human beings in all ages.
Therefore, the depiction of an action being husn or qubh, should be produced by a power beyond
the intellect: so it must come from the Shari’ah (divine law). Therefore, the characterisation of
the human action as qubh and husn comes from Shari’ah. We say then treachery is qubh and
fulfilment is husn, and sinfulness is qubh, and piety is husn, and the rebellion against the Islamic
state is qubh, and correcting its deviation, if it deviated, is a husn action, because Shari’ah has
demonstrated that. As for using the intellect as an arbitrator for husn and qubh, we have proved
this to be false. In regards to using the intellect as an evidence for what the Shari’ah has denoted,
this amounts to using the intellect as an evidence for the divine rule (hokm Shari’ah), though the
evidence for the hokm Shari’ah is the divine text not the intellect, and the role of the intellect is
to understand the hokm Shari’ah not as an evidence for it. From this discussion, husn and qubh
are only determined as such by the Shari’ah and not by the intellect.
Difference Between Khair and Sharr, and Husn and Qubh

Describing actions as husn or qubh is related to their effect in man's view and in respect to
practising them or abstaining from them. So man calls the actions which harm him or which he
dislikes as sharr, and he calls the actions which benefit him or which he likes as khair, according
to their effect on him regardless of the husn and qubh which is not considered by him in this
case. Based on this view, he undertakes the action or refrains from it. So, this view was corrected
by stating that the action is not called khair or sharr based upon his liking and disliking benefit
and harm, but the evaluation of it being khair or sharr is the pleasure and displeasure of Allah the
Supreme. So the discussion here is in regard to the criterion of khair and sharr which is common
among people, not in regard of the action itself.
With regards to characterising the actions as husn and qubh, from the angle of the judgement
upon those actions by man and related to the punishment and reward on them. Thus, man gave
himself the authority to judge upon the action as husn or qubh in analogy with the things. So,
when he found himself able to judge upon the bitter as qubh and upon the sweet thing as husn,
and on the disgusting shape as qubh and on the beautiful shape as husn, he saw that he could
judge on the truth as husn and the lie as qubh, and upon keeping ones word as husn and on the
treachery as qubh. So he gave himself the authority of judging upon the actions as husn or qubh
regardless of the subject of khair or sharr, which in this case is not considered by him. Based on
this judgement, man placed the punishments on the qubh action, and placed the rewards on the
husn action. The correct judgement of this states that the action is not compared to the thing. The
senses can appreciate in the thing the bitterness and the sweetness and the qubh and the beauty,
hence man can judge upon it. This is contrary to the action which has nothing that man can sense
so as to judge upon it as qubh or husn. Accordingly, it is absolutely wrong for him to judge upon
the action as husn or qubh from the action itself. Thus, he must take this judgement from another
source, that is Allah, the Supreme. The subject here is in regard to the judgement upon the action
not in regard to evaluating it, and is also in regard to punishment and rewards on the actions, not
in regard of undertaking them and refraining from them. Therefore, there is a difference between
khair and sharr and between the husn and qubh, which are two completely different subjects.
Value of the Action
(This is in regard of the description of actions). But concerning the aim of the action, every
worker must have an objective, for the sake of which he undertook the action. This aim is the
value of the action. Therefore, every action must have a value that man seeks to achieve when he
undertakes that action, otherwise it would be in vain. Man shouldn’t undertake actions in vain
and without purpose, but rather he must take care to achieve the intended values of the actions
undertaken.
The value of the action is either materialistic, such as commercial, agricultural and industrial
actions and the like, since the aim of undertaking these actions is to achieve materialistic benefits
from them, which is profit, a value which has importance in life. Or the value of the action is
humanitarian, such as saving drowning persons and helping the person who is needy or
disturbed, with the aim being to save the human being, regardless of his colour, race, religion or
any consideration except humanitarian. Or the value of the action is ethical, such as truth, trust,
and mercy, with the aim being the ethical aspect, regardless of the benefits or humanitarian
considerations, since the ethic could also be towards other creatures than man, like kindness to
animals and birds. A materialistic loss could occur from the ethical action, but the achievement
of its value is obligatory, which is the ethical aspect. Or the value of the action is spiritual such
as worship, accordingly its whole objective of it is not materialistic benefits, nor humanitarian

aspects, nor ethical matters, rather its aim is worship and therefore, only its spiritual value should
be achieved irrespective of all other values.
These are the values of all the actions which man strives to achieve when he undertakes every
one of his actions.
Evaluating the human societies in their life is undertaken according to these values, and the
evaluation would accord to the level of achievement of these values in society, and what their
achievement secures of comfort and tranquillity. Therefore, a Muslim has necessarily to exert his
effort to achieve the value sought for every action he undertakes when he performs and practises
this way, so as to contribute to the comfort and elevation of the society, and to secure - at the
same time - his own comfort and tranquillity.
These values are not preferential over each other or equal by themselves, because no common
qualities exist among them in order to be equated with each other or to prefer some of them over
the other. They are but results man sought when he undertook the action. Therefore, they cannot
be put in one balance, nor evaluated by one criterion, because they are in disagreement if not
contradictory. Man however, is used to differentiating between the values, to choose the best of
them, though they are not differentiated nor equal. Yet man does not accept that, so he
differentiates and equates between them. This differentiation and equalisation is not according
the value itself, but according to its effect on him. Thereupon, mankind built the differentiation
and equalisation between values upon themselves, and upon what this value bestows on them of
benefit or harm. Therefore, they establish themselves as the measure (standard), or make the
effect which effects them from these values as a measure, becoming a differentiation between the
effects of these values upon themselves, not between the values themselves. And since the
inclinations of human beings vary in regard to the effects of the values, their differentiation
between them differs accordingly.
Thus, people who are highly influenced by spiritual inclination, who ignore the materialistic
value, prefer the spiritual value over the materialistic one, and accordingly turn to prayer
(individual ibadat) and renounce the material. Therefore, they neglect the life of the world
because it is material, and they account for materialistic backwardness, and because of them, the
standard of living in the society they live declines due to what prevails in it of laziness and
lethargy.
People, who are highly influenced by materialistic inclination, neglect the spiritual value and
prefer the materialistic one and seek to achieve it. Therefore, the ideals to them become
numerous, and because of them, the society they live in becomes disturbed, and wickedness and
corruption spread in it.
Accordingly it is wrong to leave man to evaluate these values, instead they must be evaluated by
the Creator of man, who is Allah. Therefore, it is necessary that the divine law (Shari’ah) itself
determines for man these values and assigns to him the time of their performance, and according
to Shari’ah man selects them.
The Shari’ah has shown the solutions of life's problems through the commands and prohibitions
of Allah, and has obliged man to proceed in this life according to these commands and
prohibitions. It has also shown the actions that achieve the spiritual value: the obligatory and
recommended worships. It has also manifested the qualities which achieve the ethical value, and
left man to achieve the materialistic value necessary for him to satisfy his necessities and basic

needs with, and even more than these, in accordance with a certain system Shari’ah defined to
him, and commanded him not to deviate from. Man has not but to act to achieve these values in
accordance with the commands and prohibitions of Allah, and to evaluate them as Shari’ah has
demonstrated
By such, the values are achieved in the society at the level it needs as a specific society, and this
society is evaluated with the standards of these values. Upon this basis, action must be performed
to achieve the values, in order to establish the Islamic society in accordance with the Islamic
viewpoint of life.
Accordingly, human action is material which man performs materialistically. But when he
undertakes it he realises his relationship with Allah from the perspective that his action is
permissible (halal) or prohibited (haram), so he undertakes it or abstains from it according to this
basis. Thus, man's realisation of his relationship with Allah, is the spirit, which obliges man to
know the Shari’ah (law) of Allah to distinguish his actions. Thus, he distinguishes the khair from
the sharr when he knows the actions pleases Allah and those which anger Him; and distinguishes
the qubh from the husn when Shari’ah assigns for him the husn action and the qubh action; and
seeks the values which are imperative for the Islamic life in the Islamic society according to what
Shari’ah has assigned. By this, he will be able, when he undertakes the action, and realises his
relationship with Allah, to engage in or abstain from an action in accordance with this
realisation, because he knows the type of action, its description and its value. Thereupon, the
philosophy of Islam is the mixing of the material with the spirit, that is, making the actions
directed by the commands and prohibitions of Allah. This philosophy is permanent and necessary
for each action, whether it is small or large, minute or great. It is also the depiction of life. And
since the Islamic creed (Aqeeda) is the basis of life, the basis of the philosophy, the basis of the
systems of life, then the Islamic hadara - which is the total concepts about life from the viewpoint
of Islam - is built upon one spiritual basis, which is the creed (Aqeeda); and its depiction of life
is the mixing of the material with the spirit; and the sense of happiness in its view is the
satisfaction of Allah.
The Doctrine and Systems
While the doctrine (Aqeeda) resolves the greatest problem is the basis of man’s actions and upon
which the viewpoint in life is based, and the philosophy controls the action, then the system
which emanates from this creed (Aqeeda) addresses man’s problems and organises his actions
accurately. Hence, the application of the system is the criterion in determining whether a land is
Dar al Kufr or the Dar al-Islam.
The land in which Islam’s systems are applied, and is governed by that which Allah has revealed,
is considered a Dar al-Islam, even if the majority of its population is non-Muslim. While the land
in which ruling is by other than what Allah has revealed is considered a Dar al-Kufr, even if the
majority of its population is Muslim. Accordingly, after the doctrine, the priority is given to be
the systems of Islam and their application. The application of the system along with the doctrine
produces, naturally, the Islamic mentality and the Islamic behaviour within the Ummah, and
makes the Muslim a distinguished exalted personality.
Islam Organises Man's Life as a Human Being
Islam considers man an integrated being (indivisible whole), and addresses his actions with
Ahkam Shari’ah in a consistent and balanced manner regardless of the number and type of these

actions. These Ahkam Shari’ah are the Islamic system which address man's problems. However,
when it addresses his problems, it deals with them in a manner considering the fact that every
problem requires a solution i.e. considering it a problem that requires a hokm Shari’ah. Islam
addresses all problems as human problems and nothing else. So when Islam treats an economical
problem, such as the husband's financial support of his wife, or a ruling problem, such as the
appointment of a Khalifah, or a social problem such as marriage, it does not address that problem
as an economical, or as a ruling, or as a social problem, but rather it treats the problem as a
human problem to which a solution should be derived i.e. a hukm shar’ia should be derived.
Islam has one method in addressing man's problems which is to, understand the real context of
the issue and then derive (extract) the rule of Allah from the Islamic legislative sources.
Divine Rules and the Illah(legal reason)
The Islamic system is composed of Ahkam Shari’ah related to Ibadat, morals, food stuffs,
clothing, social relationships (or societal) and penal code.
The divine rules related to Ibadat, morals, food-stuffs, and clothing cannot be reasoned by
Illah(legal reason). The Messenger (SAW) said: "Wine was forbidden for itself." However the
Ahkam Shari’ah related to social relationships and penal code are reasoned by Illah(legal
reason). This is because the hokm Shari’ah in these matters is built upon a reason which was the
cause of the existence of the rule. Many people are used to accounting “benefit” as the reason for
all the rules due to the influence by the western ideology and the western culture which solely
views benefit as a criterion for actions. Such an understanding contradicts the Islamic Ideology
which considers the spirit as the basis for all the actions, and makes the mixing of the spirit with
the material the basis of the action. Accordingly, the Ahkam Shari’ah related to Ibadat, morals,
food-stuffs, and clothing are absolutely not reasoned, since there is no Illah(legal reason) for
these rules. They should be taken as in the text since they are not based upon a Illah(legal
reason). Thus, prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, Zakah, the method of praying (Salah), the number of
its rak'at, the rites of pilgrimage (Hajj), and the minimum amount of property liable to payment
of Zakah (Nisab of Zakah), and the like should be taken, accepted and submitted to as they came
in the text (tawkifiyyah) and no Illah(legal reason) is sought for them. The same thing applies for
the prohibition of eating the meat of a dead animal, pork and the like. Seeking Illah(legal reason)
for these rules is wrong and dangerous because if an Illah(legal reason) was, the result would be,
if the Illah(legal reason) of the rule ceased to exist then the rule would no longer exist. The
Illah(legal reason) is connected with the rule by its existence and absence. As an example, if we
assumed cleanliness was the Illah(legal reason) for the wudu, and physical exercise as the
Illah(legal reason) for prayer, and hygiene as the Illah(legal reason) for fasting etc., then in this
situation where the Illah(legal reason) doesn’t exist, the rule wouldnít exist either. The whole
matter is not like this, for the Illah(legal reason) is dangerous for the rule and its appreciation.
Thus, it is obligatory to take rules of Ibadat as they are, without establishing an Illah(legal
reason) for them. As for the Hikmah(wisdom) behind a law, Allah alone knows it, since our mind
cannot conceive the essence of Allah, and hence we cannot comprehend His Hikmah(wisdom).
As for the Hikmah(wisdom) mentioned in the texts, such as the saying of Allah the Supreme,
"Lo! Prayer (Salah) preserves from lewdness and iniquity", and Allah (SWT)’s saying, "That
they may witness things that are of benefit to them", and for His saying, "That which you give in
Zakah seeking Allah's countenance, has increased manifold", and other Hikmahs(wisdom) stated
in the texts, they should be taken literally as mentioned in the text without applying analogy in
them. Unless the Hikmah(wisdom) of the rule is mentioned in a text, neither Hikmah(wisdom)
and therefore nor a Illah(legal reason) has to be sought for the rule. This is in respect to Ibadat.
The morals are however values for which rules have been established for satisfying virtues and

withholding from vice. They were also established as result of Ibadat as well as well as rules
which must be observed in societal relationships. This is because Islam aims in its legislation to
divert man to the highest standard achievable. Man, hence has to work towards acquiring the
supreme qualities and to maintain them. The good moral is a value which is intended to be
achieved because it is one which Shari’ah has stated, and its value is fulfilled once the
performance is according to Allah’s commands. Morals are a section of the Islamic Shari’ah, and
a part of the commands and prohibitions of Allah which must be achieved by every Muslim so
that his performance of Islam becomes completed, and his action according to the commands and
prohibitions of Allah is perfected.
A Muslim does neither acquire moral attributes for their sake, nor for their benefit, rather he
observes them only because Allah commanded him to act accordingly and for no other reason.
So, a Muslim is not characterised with truthfulness for the truthfulness itself, nor for the benefit
it has, rather because Allah ordered him to do so.
As for the Muslim who does not acquire morals for the sake of morals, this is because of the
judgement on actions. An action which man performs for its own sake might be bad, but he
thought it good, and he performed it. He might also be characterised with a moral for the sake of
it which is “Qubh“ but he considers it a good attribute by which his personality is characterised
and thus it would be an error for man to perform morals for their own sake. And unless Islam
defines the good attributes and the bad attributes, and unless the Muslim performs them
according to this definition, acquiring these attributes would not be in compliance with the
Ahkam Shari’ah. Therefore, the Muslim should not be considered truthful for the sake of
truthfulness, nor should he be pitiful for the sake of being pitiful, nor should he be characterised
with all the morals for their own sake. Rather he should be characterised with them as commands
from Allah, because the fundamental fact is that these morals are based on the Islamic creed.
Observing this issue would guarantee the establishment of the morals in individuals protecting
and maintaining its purity from any distorting factors. Therefore, the best way to perfect morals
is to confine them to what is stated in the text (Quran and Sunnah), have them restricted by the
spiritual basis, and built upon the Islamic creed.
As for not acquiring morals for the sake of benefit, this is because benefit has nothing in common
with morals and should not be aimed at, lest it corrupts it and makes it revolve around the
benefit. Hence, morals are attributes which man must be characterised with, freely and willingly,
by the incentive of taqwa (the fear of Allah). A Muslim does not abide by morals simply because
they benefit or harm him in life, rather he does so in response to the commands and prohibitions
of Allah. This is the understanding which makes the characterisation with good morals
permanent and steadfast, i.e. it does not revolve around the benefit.
Such morals, built on the exchange of benefit, would make the individual a hypocrite, revealing a
certain behaviour while concealing his true nature. Because after all morals to him is determined
and built on benefit, so he revolves around the benefit. After all he connects the reasoned rules to
their Illah(legal reasoning), and does not believe in the existence of the rules nor in their
obligation if their Illah(legal reasoning) vanished.
Therefore, morals cannot be reasoned, and should never be taken by their Illah(legal reasoning).
They have to be accepted as they came in sharÌa, irrespective of any Illah(legal reasoning). It is
erroneous and dangerous to seek Illah(legal reasoning) for morals, so to guarantee that these
morals disappear when the Illah(legal reasoning) has vanished.

Therefore, it becomes evident that the objective of the Ibadat is the spiritual value only and the
objective of morals is the ethical value. They must be restricted to these intended values only.
Neither benefits nor interests should be manifested in the Ibadat and morals, because such
manifestation is dangerous, causing individuals hypocrisy when they make Ibadat or manifest
morals, and leading these to the abandonment of the Ibadat and morals when they no longer
demonstrate any benefit or interest.
Mans Actions and Illah(legal reasoning)
In regard to the Ahkam Shari’ah related to man's actions these are based on the text(Quran and
Sunnah). Some of the text which include a Illah(legal reasoning), as in respect to giving the
spoils of Bani Nadhir to the Muhajireen not the Ansar, in this regard Allah(SWT) says: that it
does not become a commodity between the rich among you." while some other text do not
include an Illah(legal reasoning) at all such as: Allah has permitted trading and has forbidden
Riba." Therefore any rules where basic text included an Illah(legal reasoning), these are reasoned
and Qiyas may be applied; whereas for the rules whose text is without Illah(legal reasoning), a
Illah(legal reasoning) is not sought and Qiyas cannot be applied. The valid Illah(legal reasoning)
is the Shari’ah Illah that is mentioned in the text from Qur'an and Sunnah, for only these two are
the Shari’ah texts. Therefore, the Illah upon which the reasoned hokm Shari’ah is built is a
Shari’ah Illah but not a rational Illah, i.e. it must be mentioned in the text either explicitly, or
implicitly by deriving it from one or more texts through Qiyas. Accordingly, the rules revolve
with their Illah under all circumstances. So we find a thing is prohibited in a situation due to an
existent Shari’ah Illah, and if this Illah disappears that very thing becomes permissible. So the
hokm Shari’ah is connected with the Illah in existence and in absence, so when it exists the hukm
exists, and if the Illah does not exist the rule doesn’t exist either.
However, the absence of the rule due to the absence of the Illah does not at all mean that the
Hukm Shar’ia has changed, rather the hokm Shari’ah of the question remains as it is, without
change: only the rule is no longer applied to the absence of the Illah, and will be applied once the
Illah existent.
The relationship of the rule with the Illah in existence and in absence does not mean that the
rules be changed due to the change of the time and place, thus claiming that bringing about the
benefit and preventing harm is the Illah of the Hukm Shari’ah which changes as the time and
place change, so the Hukm Shari’ah changes accordingly. This is because bringing about benefit
and preventing harm are not at all the Illah of the Akham, since no text came to denote that
bringing about benefit and preventing harm are Illah for all the Akham, nor to denote that they
are a Illah for a specific rule. Thus, it cannot be taken as a shar’ia Illah.
Moreover, the Shar’ia Illah is that which is taken from a shar’ia text and therefore should be
restricted to it and its meaning. The shar’ia text has neither indicated that bringing about a
benefit nor warding off corruption as being the Illah. Thus, the shar’ia Illah would be that which
the shar’ia text has brought, not the bringing about of benefit nor warding off corruption.
Whatever is mentioned in the text is free from the influence of the time or the place or the action
itself, instead it is mentioned in the text in manifesting the illah of the rule. Because this text
never changes no consideration is given to time and place, nor to bringing about benefit and
preventing harm.
Accordingly, Ahkam rules do not change with the change of time and place, they rather remain
as such regardless of the change of times and places.

As for the change of Customs and norms of people. This does not have an effect in changing the
rule, for the Customs (norms) are not a Illah of the Hukm Shar’ia nor its source. The Customs
(norms) may agree or disagree with the shar'ia. If they disagree with the shar'ia then the shar'ia
has come to abrogate them and change them, since the sharÌa function is to change the corrupted
Customs (norms), because they cause corruption of the society. Therefore, they are not taken as a
source for the Hukm Shar’ia nor a Illah for it, and the rule does not change because of it.
However, if the Customs (norms) were in agreement with sharÌa, then the rule is proved by its
shar’ia evidence and by the Shari’ah Illah and not by these traditions, even if these traditions do
not contradict the sharÌa. Therefore, the customs and norms cannot rule over the sharÌa, rather the
sharÌa rules over the traditions and customs. Accordingly, the Hukm Shar’ia has its own evidence
which is the text and has its own shar’ia Illah, while the customs and norms are not a part of
them.
As for the suitability of the Islamic Shari’ah for every time and place, it results from the fact that
the Islamic Shari’ah addresses man's problems by its rules through all times and places and is
capable of solving all man's problems irrespective of how diverse and numerous they are. When
Islam addresses the problems of man, it considers him in his capacity as a human being, not in
any other capacity. Man, in every time and place, is still the same man with respect to his
instincts and biological needs without changing at all, so the rules which solve his problems do
not change. The thing which changes is the patterns of man's life, which do not affect his view
point towards life. In regard of the renewed numerous demands of man, they emerge as a result
of his endeavour to satisfy his instincts and biological needs. The Shari’ah was revealed to solve
such new and numerous demands, regardless of his diversity or how their patterns change.
Actually, this was one of the factors which contributed towards the growth of Fiqh. But this vast
capacity of the Shari’ah does not mean that it is flexible and adapts to everything or to every
issue even if it contradicts shar’ia. Nor does it mean that it evolves thereby it changes with time.
It rather means that the texts have the capacity for numerous rules to be derived from, and it also
means that the rules have the capacity to apply on many issues. So for example, Allah (SWT)
says; "Then if they give suckle for you (your children) give them their due payment." From this
verse a Hukm Shar’ia is derived, that the divorced woman deserves a compensation for suckling
the baby. Another Hukm Shar’ia is derived from it, that the hired person, whosoever, is entitled
to a wage if he has carried out his work, whether he is a private or a public employee. This rule
applies on numerous questions, such as the government employee, the labourer in the factory, the
farmer on the farm and the like, every one of them is entitled to his wage if he has completed his
work, because he is a private employee. So too, the carpenter who makes the cupboard, the tailor
who sews the dress, the shoemaker who makes the shoe and the like, every one of them is
entitled to his wage if he has carried out his work because he is a public employee. Since the
employment is a contract between an employer and an employee the Ruler is not included,
because he is not hired by the Ummah, but rather he executes the Hukm Shar’ia i.e. implements
Islam, and accordingly, the Khalifah is not entitled to a wage for carrying out his work, since he
was given the pledge to implement the sharÌa and to convey the Islamic call, so he is not
employed by the Ummah. Similarly, his assistants (deputies), i.e. the members of the executive
and the Walis (governors) not entitled to a wage for carrying out their work since their work is
ruling, thus they are not employees; therefore, they do not take a salary, but an amount is
assigned to them to satisfy their needs, due to being kept preoccupied from practising their own
business.
This ample capacity of the text enabling many rules to be derived from it and the ample ability of
the rules to be applicable in many problems is what makes Islamic Shar’ia suitable to address all

problems in life at all places and times as well as to all people and generations. This cannot be
described as flexibility and evolution.
The Daleel of the Hukm Shar’ia rule taken from the text, either Qur'an or the Sunnah, is to
address the issue at hand, because the Legislator(ALLAH) followed the meaning of the text
rather than to stick to its literal form. Therefore, when deriving the Ahkam shar’ia, attention has
to be paid to the Illah mentioned in then text i.e. it has to be observed in the text, from the
legislative perspective, when deriving the rule.
The Daleel may indicate a Illah for the rule, or the Illah may be taken from one or more other
evidences. Although the rule is derived from the daleel, nevertheless the sense of the Illah behind
it is observed, without adhering to the example mentioned in the text and addressed as the time of
revelation of Allah (SWT) "Prepare for them all you can of (armed) force and of horses tethered,
that thereby you strike fear in the heart of the enemy of Allah and your enemy". The Hukm
concerns the preparation of power, and the problem at hand addressed at that time was by
building through tethering the horses, and the sense of the Illah behind this Hukm is to strike fear
in the enemy. Therefore, when we derive today the rule of preparation of force from this daleel
we observe the sense of the Illah behind the Hukm, and accordingly we prepare whatever needed
to strike fear or alarm the enemy; without restricting ourselves to the means which came in the
text (i.e. the hoses tethered) to address the problem at hand at that time.
Therefore the method should be followed in every daleel from which a rule is derived, since the
purpose is to fulfil the Illah intended in the text. Accordingly, sharÌa requires that the rules
related to the societal relations among people be based upon their Illah; observing the legislative
perspective and not the example that came in the text when deriving the rules from these texts.
The Legislative Sources
As Qur'an and Sunnah are sources for Hukm Shar’ia, the Ijma'a (consensus) and the Qiyas are
also considered likewise. Accordingly, the detailed shar’ia evidences of the shar’ia rules are, the
Qur’an, the Sunnah, Ijma'a and Qiyas. As for the opinion of a sahabi related to matters of Ijtihad,
it is not a daleel, because the sahabi is like any Mujtahid, and he is subject to error. Furthermore,
the sahaba had differed over some issues and every one held an opinion different from the other.
So if the opinion of the sahabi was taken as a daleel then the sources would be different and
contradictory. Therefore, the opinion of the sahabi is not considered a shar’ia daleel, but rather it
is allowed to be followed like the other acknowledged opinions and schools of thought.
However, rules agreed upon by the sahaba are not a mere opinion for them, but rather it is Ijma'a.
As for the sharÌa of the earlier nations, it is neither considered a sharÌa for us, nor is it considered
to be a source of legislation. Although the Islamic creed (Aqeeda) mandates for us to believe in
all the prophets and messengers, and in the Books revealed to them, however the meaning of the
belief in them is the belief in their prophethood and their messages and in the Books revealed to
them, and does not mean to follow them. After the prophethood of Mohammed (SAW) all people
are requested and ordered to give up their Deen and to embrace Islam, since no Deen other than
Islam is acknowledged. Allah (SWT) said "Lo! Deen with Allah is Islam". Allah (SWT) said
also; "And whosoever seeks a Deen other than Islam it will not be accepted from him," and this
is explicit. From these verses the principle "SharÌa of the people before us is not a sharÌa for us"
was derived. This is strengthened by the Ijma of Sahaba(agreed) that the Shari’ah of Mohammed
(SAW) abrogates all the previous Shari’ah (divine laws). Also Allah (SWT) says "And unto you
have we revealed the Book with the truth, confirming whatever Book was before it and

controlling over it", i.e. to say, dominating over it. The domination of the Qur'an over the
previous Books is an abrogation of the previous Shari’ah, believing in them and abrogating them.
It was narrated that when the Prophet (SAW) saw Omar bin Al Khattab reading a from a leaf of
the Torah he (SAW) got angry and said "Didn't I bring it pure and clean , and By Allah had my
brother Musa (Moses) been present now he would have no choice but to follow me." Many of the
rituals of Hajj such as Tawaf around the Ka'aba, touching and kissing the black stone, and
running between Safat and Marwah were practised at the time of jahiliya, and when we perform
them as Ibadat, we don't practise them considering them as rituals of a previous Shari’ah, because
they are from the Islamic Shari’ah, since Islam brought them as new Ahkam Shari’ah rules, but
did not approve them as part of a previous Shari’ah. Similarly, we do not perform nor abide by
what previous deens prescribed, rather we only follow what Islam brought us. Therefore,
Christians and the Jews are addressed with the Islamic Shari’ah and ordered to leave theirs,
because Islam abrogated it. If this is an obligation on the followers of the Jewish Shari’ah, the
Jews and the Christians, then how can a Muslim be ordered to take the earlier Shari’ah as his
Shar’ia. With regards to the saying of Allah (SWT) "We revealed to you as we revealed to
Noah", what is meant is that He revealed to him (Mohammed SAW) the same way as He
revealed to the other prophets. And "He has ordained for you that Deen which He commanded
unto Noah", means that He ordained the origin of Tawhid which He ordained for Noah. In the
Ayat "Then we revealed to you to follow the faith (Mellah) of Ibrahim", which means to follow
the origin of Tawhid, because “Mellah” means the origin of Tawhid. What is meant in all of
these verses and the like is that the Prophet (SAW) is not an innovator among the messengers (of
Allah), rather he was sent (as a messenger) like them and that the origin of Tawhid is the Deen
common to all prophets and messengers. But apart from that, every messenger had been sent with
a specific Deen; Allah (SWT) said: "For each we have appointed a Shar’ia and a traced-out
way".
Accordingly the previous Shari’ah law is neither a Shari’ah for us, and nor is it considered one of
the legislative sources, from which the rules are derived.
Deriving rules (Ahkam) is performed by mujtahids, because for knowing the hukm of Allah in a
specific issue cannot be reached except by Ijtihad. accordingly, there must be Ijtihad. The
scholars of usool have stated that Ijtihad is fard kifaya (collective obligation) on Muslims and
that no generation should be without a mujtahid. If all Muslims agree to leave Ijtihad they would
be sinful, this is because the way of finding out the divine rules is by Ijtihad. So, if an generation
was without a mujtahid who is able to derive rules, this would result in the abandoning of
Shari’ah, and to the elimination of the shar’ia rules, a matter which is not allowed. Nevertheless,
Ijtihad has conditions which have been elaborated by the scholars of usool; accordingly Ijtihad
requires wide knowledge, correct understanding of the texts and a satisfactory knowledge of
Arabic linguistics; and it needs an acquaintance with the shar’ia matters and an understanding of
their daleel.
Therefore, extracting the rule without careful study and without careful examination, is not
called Istinbat (deriving rules). Likewise, the mere seeking of a benefit in a certain Hukm
followed by misconstruction of the texts and misinterpreting them to derive that rule is not called
Ijtihad; rather it is an insult to the Deen of Allah, and whoever commits that deserves the
punishment of Allah(SWT).
Though true that the door of Ijtihad is open, but it is open for the scholars (ulema) not for the
ignorant. Mujtahids are of three types: Mujtahid Mutlaq and mujtahid within madhab, these two
have specific prerequisites. As for the third type it is the mujtahid performing Ijtihad on specific

issues capable of understanding the text, and to pursue the issue, its daleel and its daleel of other
mujtahids regarding it. This type of Ijtihad is necessary for every Muslim who needs to know the
rules of Allah, since sharÌa has ordained finally that every Muslim should be able to derive the
rule from the daleel for issues he encounters in his daily life.
However, after recording the madhabs of the mujtahids and the principles of Ijtihad and the rules
were laid down, the notion of Ijtihad became weak amongst individuals and the number of
mujtahids decreased. Thus, it prevailed on Muslims to make taqleed i.e. to follow mazhabs, and
Ijtihad among them became rare till the concept of taqleed prevailed to such an extent that some
people started to call for the door of Ijtihad to be closed, and to speak of taqleed as obligatory.
Accordingly this the overwhelming majority of Muslims, if not all of them, became muqallid.
The muqallid is of two kinds: muttabi'a (follower) and ammi (common). The difference between
the muttabi’a and the ammi is that the muttabi’a takes the rule derived by a mujtahid after he is
convinced of the daleel which the mujtahid depended upon, and he does not follow unless he is
aware of the daleel. The ammi, however, is the one who follows the mujtahid in the shar’ia rule
without looking for daleel. Indeed the muttabi’a is of a better quality than the ammi; so most of
the earlier generations were of the muttabi’a for they were concerned to learn the evidences.
When the age of decline came, and it became difficult for the people to follow the mujtahids,
they began to follow the scholars and mujtahids in the rules concerning themselves without
seeking the daleel. What encouraged this situation was the silence of ulema and their consent that
a person could be ammi even if he was an educated person. The ulema were silent about this
because taqleed is permissible, whether the muqallid is a muttabi’a or ammi. Originally, the
Muslim should be able to take the rule from its daleel, although he is allowed to imitate; thus, he
is allowed to be a muttabi’a, i.e. he knows the rule and knows its daleel and becomes convinced
of it. This makes the Muslim qualified for Ijtihad, even in the one issue, a matter which is
necessary for us in our current age. issuing a fatwa is not considered Ijtihad in an issue, because
it does not belong to the category of Ijtihad. It is the worst of what has been within fiqh. This is
because after the age of mujtahids, their students and the students of their students followed, and
who turned to elaborate on the opinions of the madhab, laying down its foundation and
consolidating the opinions. That age was considered to be the golden age of fiqh in which the
master references of fiqh books in the various madhabs have been written. These books are
considered the backbone reference in the fiqh issues. This era continued until the seventh century
AH., when followed the decline in fiqh appeared. The age of commenting and footnotes began
and most of the writing lacked originality, Istinbat and Ijtihad even on one issue. Then came an
age in which the decline was deeper the ulema followed in the way of listing the issues and the
rules without making reference to their different aspects and details. They called these questions
fatwas. Therefore, it is wrong to make a fatwa as a reference in Fiqh, and it is incorrect to take
them as a reference for the Ahkam Shar’ia as well. Because it did not follow the genuine method
of Ijtihad in deriving the rules.
It is not permissible to use the books which were written in a way similar to the western Law
books codifying the Ahkam Shar’ia as a reference for them, because these books are an aspect of
imitation of Western laws, and because the codification shrinks and reduces the fiqh, and it is
dominated by taking fiqh issues without a daleel or a weak daleel. It is also dominated by the
notion of adapting to the age and the twisted interpretation to comply with the western viewpoint
in solving the problems. This is in addition to the lack of the legislative aspect and the absence of
the Ijtihad in these books. So it is irrelevant for application or to be a reference, for its existence
was a disaster on fiqh and legislation because it was an attempt at imitation that weakened the
people’s perception of Islamic fiqh. The resource and reference of Islamic fiqh is vast, and is the

richest jurisprudence of all nations and it is necessary for the judges and the rulers. However,
their codifying it in a form which imitates the canonical format has shrunk and disgraced it. It
made the judges, when they confined themselves to the knowledge of these canons, ignorant in
fiqh. In addition to that, these books lack the appropriate legal style, because they consist of a
collection of jurisprudence texts of some jurists introduced under numerical listing without any
attempt to establish general maxims that could then be taken as the subject of the articles, with
different issues falling under them. Instead the issues themselves were put as separate articles,
which is not compatible with the canonical format. Even when some of the articles included Fiqh
maxims, it was not in a comprehensive manner and those maxims were no more than definitions
from the Fiqh books, and almost all of them followed this style. Consequently, it is not
permissible to take those canons as a reference, because of their erroneous style, shallow
information, and remoteness from the considered Ahkam Shar’ia taken from their daleel.
In order to put a constitution and cannons which can be comprehended by the judges and rulers,
the following method in legislation should be followed:
1. The human problems have to be studied, a general constitution is written addressing them in
the form of general comprehensive principles or general shar’ia rules. The rules have to be
derived from the Islamic fiqh, on condition that they are taken by adopting them from one of the
mujtahids, mentioning their daleel and being convinced of them; or would be taken from the
Qur’an, the Sunnah, Ijma'a or Qiyas, but through a correct Ijtihad, even if it is the Ijtihad on one
issue. In the justification for each article, the madhab from which it is taken used together with
its daleel, or the daleel from which it was deduced must be mentioned. Neither the influence of
the bad situation of the Muslims, nor to the situation of the other nations, nor to the non-Islamic
systems should be taken into consideration when acting accordingly.
2. Ahkam Shar’ia should be put as draft canons for the penal code, transactions and legal
systems. This should be according to the aforementioned criteria and compatibility with the
constitution, with reference to the madhab and the daleel, on the condition that the formulation is
canonical based on general maxims so to serve as a reference for the judges and the rulers.
3. The Shari’ah texts, the Islamic Fiqh and usool-ul-fiqh should be the reference for interpreting
the constitution and the laws to The judges and rulers, in order to facilitate the means of deep
understanding.
The judge is not permitted to issue verdicts contradictory to what the state has adopted, because
the decree of the Imam is to be executed overtly and covertly. In cases however, where the state
has not adopted rules, the judge will issue the verdict based on the Hukm Shar’ia he views
applicable on the case, whether this opinion is of one of the mujtahids or an opinion derived by
his Ijtihad.
4. When deriving the rules and when adopting them, it is necessary to understand the reality of
the issue and then understand Allah’s rule on the issue; in other words to understand the rule of
Allah which He ruled with on this issue, then applying one on the other. In other words, to arrive
to the Hukm Shar’ia through understanding of the reality of the issue and full awareness of
Allah’s rule related to it.
The state implements the Islamic Shari’ah upon all those who hold citizenship. Muslim or
otherwise. With regards to the non-Muslims they should be left to practise their own belief and
worships. They are treated in the matters of food-stuffs and clothes according to their religion

within the framework of public order. The matters of family affairs amongst themselves, such as
marriage and divorce, will be settled according to their Deen. As for the rest of the Islamic
Shari’ah like matters of societal relationships, penal code, ruling and economic systems, they are
implemented upon all citizens; their implementation will be upon Muslims and non-Muslims
alike. With regards to Muslims, the state implements upon them the entire Islamic Shari’ah
whether it is worship, morals, societal relationships and penal code etc. The duty of the state is to
implement Islam completely and to consider its implementation upon non-Muslims as Dawah for
them to Islam. The SharÌa is universal to mankind; and, the state implements it in every country
under its rule, in order to convey the call to its people. The secret behind the Islamic conquests is
to convey the call to Islam.
Islam is a creed from which a system emanates. This system is the Shari’ah rules derived from
the detailed evidences. Islam has demonstrated in its system the manner in which its rules are
implemented by Shari’ah rules. The Shari’ah rules which demonstrate the manner of
implementation are the method; and all rules beyond that are the Fitra. Accordingly, Islam is an
Fitra(idea) and a method. Thus, the creed and the Shari’ah rules which solve man's problems are
the fitra(idea), and the Shari’ah rules which demonstrate the manner of implementing these
solutions, protecting the creed and how to carry the da’awa, are the method. Therefore, Islam's
method is of the same nature as its idea and it is a part of Islam. Accordingly it is not allowed to
only confine the call for Islam to the demonstration of its idea but rather the call must also
include the method as well. Therefore, the ideology is a combination of the idea and the method.
The belief in the method is as important as the belief in the idea and it is necessary that the
method and the idea be an indivisible whole, linked together tightly such that nothing but the
Islamic method be used in the implementation of the Islamic idea. Both form Islam, by which it
is governed and for which the call is conveyed. Since the method exists in the Shari’ah, it should
be restricted to that which the SharÌa has brought and what is derived from its texts. As the rules
of the idea were included in the Qur'an and the Sunnah, likewise the rules of the method were
also embodied in the Qur’an and Sunnah. When Allah (SWT): "And if you fear treachery from
any folk, then throw back to them (their treaty) fairly." This is from the rules of the method.
Also, the saying of the Prophet (saw); "Don't wish to face the enemy and if you face him, stand
firm," is from the rules of the method. Subsequently, all the rules of the method like all other
rules are derived by Ijtihad from the Qur'an, Sunnah, Ijma'a and Qiyas, like all other rules. Since
the Sunnah is an explanation of the Qur'an, the idea is summed up in the Qur'an and detailed in
the Sunnah; the method is also summed up in the Qur'an and detailed in the Sunnah. Thus, it is
obligatory upon us to take as the light of guidance our master Mohammed (SAW), the Messenger
of Allah. We should take the rules of the method from his deeds which exist in his Sirah (life)
and from his speech and consent as we take them from the Qur’an, since all that is Shari’ah. And
we make our example in understanding the Sirah, the rightly guided Khalifahs and all the other
sahaba; and we make our ration the effective means in the understanding and derivation of rules
according to the Shar’ia aspects.
The Shari’ah rules that explain the way of implementation of any indicate action. These actions
must be performed, whether they are related to the implementation or to carrying the da’awa.
These actions cannot be viewed as means, because means are a device used when performing the
actions which change according to the actions, and vary according to the situation and are
influenced by the type of action. However the actions indicated by the method do not change,
rather they should be performed based upon the text. It should be noted that no action should be
carried out defined that which is explained by the SharÌa. Additionally, no action should be
undertaken except in the context defined by Hukm Shari’ah.

On examining those actions which are defined by the Shari’ah rules related to the method, we
find that they are materialistic actions achieving tangible results. They are not actions aimed at
achieving non-tangible results, even though both actions achieve the same value. For example,
the supplication (dua'a) is a materialistic action that achieves a spiritual value, and jihad is also a
materialistic action that achieves a spiritual value. But, dua'a, although it is a materialistic action,
achieves a non-tangible result which is the reward, even if the intention of its performer was to
achieve a spiritual value. This is in contrast to jihad, fighting the enemy, which is a materialistic
action which achieves a tangible result, e.g. opening of a fortress or city, or killing the enemy and
the like, even if the intention of the mujahid was to achieve the spiritual value. Accordingly, the
actions of the method are materialistic actions that achieve tangible results, and they differ from
other actions. Therefore, dua'a is not taken as a method for jihad, though the Mujahid prays to
Allah. Likewise, preaching is not taken as a method to deter the thief, though he is advised and
instructed. Allah (SWT) says: "And fight them until persecution is no more, and all Deen is for
Allah." Allah (SWT) also says: “And for the thief, both male and female, cut off their hand."
Therefore, it is completely unacceptable to say that all actions related to implementing the
Islamic Idea do not lead towards tangible reality. This is contrary to the nature of the Islamic
methodology and it does not make any difference whether the actions taken to implement the
rules are related to the solving of the problems, or actions used to convey the Islamic da’awa.
‘Salah’, for example, is considered part of the idea, and the method of its implementation is the
state. It is not permissible to the state to use education and instruction alone as a method to make
people perform the salah, but rather the state has to undertake punishing measures against anyone
who abandons prayer, imprisonment even, though the state undertakes education and instruction.
Similarly carrying the Islamic da’awa is part of the idea, and the method of its implementation by
the state is jihad, i.e. fighting against the enemies. So it is not permissible for the state to use the
recitation Sahih Al-Bukhari as a method to remove the materialistic obstacles from the way of
the da’awa. Instead, the state must use jihad, as a method which is the materialistic fight against
the enemies. The same applies to all actions related to the method.
It must be noted however that, though the action which is part of the method is a materialistic
action with tangible results, this action should be directed by the commands and prohibitions of
Allah with the intention of acquiring Allah’s pleasure. The Muslim must always keep in mind
that he recognises and maintains his relationship with Allah seeking to get closer to Allah
through salah, dua, recitation of the Quran etc. He has also to believe that victory(Nasr) is from
Allah, consequently, it is necessary to maintain Taqwa established in the heart to implement the
rules of Allah. It is also necessary to make dua'a and to remember Allah (dikr), also to maintain
the relationship with Allah whenever undertaking all the actions.
Sensation and thought
This is regarding the method being Shari’ah rules which we must follow and not be allowed to
disagree with, and in regards to the actions which must be directed towards achieving tangible
results. But in regard of achieving the results, we should always keep in mind that the action
undertaken should be based on the idea we believe in while aiming at a specific results. In other
words that the perception of the reality of an issue must be connected with the known related
information, should produce a thought. This thought shouldn’t be hypothetical but rather linked
with the action. The thought and action should be aimed towards achieving a specific objective
and all this should be based on the Iman in order to keep the individual permanently in the
atmosphere of Iman. However, It is not permitted, at all, to separate action from thoughts or from
the specific objective or from Iman, since in this separation - no matter how small - is very

harmful on the action itself and in regards to its results and to its continuity. Therefore, this
defined objective should be understood and clear for each individual who wants to perform any
actions. It is also obligatory that the sensory perception be the basis, i.e. the understanding and
thought be the result of sensation not of mere hypothetical assumption or imagination. The
sensation of the reality should be carried to the brain, and connected (with the previous
information) on the issue would produce brain activity which is the thought. This is what
guarantee the depth in thinking and productivity in the action. The sensory perception enhances
the intellectual sensation, i.e. sensation which is strengthened in the individual by the thought.
Thus, for example, the feeling and perception of the carriers of the da’awa once they have
understood the da’awa becomes stronger than before such a state.
It is harmful for man to jump from sensation to action without thinking. Such behaviour will
never change the reality, instead it will make the person succumbing to reality and reactionary,
proceeding in life with declined thinking, making the reality the source of his thinking rather than
the subject of the thought. Therefore, the feeling and sensing of the situation should first lead to
thinking, then this thought should lead to action. This is what enables the individual to rise above
the reality, enables the effort to change to better situations in a radical way. Any person acting on
the basis of his feeling will never be able to change the situation but rather adapts himself to the
status quo. Thus he will remain backward and in a state of decline. While the one who perceives
and feels the reality then thinks of the methodology of changing it, and then acts according to this
thought, he will make the reality adapted to the ideology, and changes it completely. This the
type of person is consistent with the radical comprehensive approach, which is the only method
to resume the Islamic way of life. This method mandates that the thinking should result from
sensation and feeling the situation, after which this thought is clearly defined in a way that the
outline of the thought and the method are well understood. The individual will then understand
the ideology correctly leading him to undertake the appropriate action. Once the individual has
acquired this understanding, he will be changed completely. He proceeds to change the society
and the atmosphere and environment based on this thought, producing amongst the masses a
change in the public opinion after reshaping the general awareness about the ideology (as a
thought and method). Based upon this and through ruling authority the ideology will be
implemented radically, without accepting any gradual or patchwork solution. Such an approach
necessitates that the thinking should result after sensation and be attached to the action required
to achieve specific results. Nothing could lead to this except the deep thought.
Study in Islam
This deep thought is need prerequisites that which initiate it, develop and enhance it.
Additionally the comprehensive method of change requires to build individuals and prepare
society on the basis of the Islamic Ideology. Building this deep thinking and the preparing of
people by the ideology, requires from those who work for the change both the study of Islam and
the understanding of society. This cannot be achieved except through a culturing process. The
culturing process is the easiest and shortest way to communicate the necessary knowledge to the
mind in order to bring this thinking into existence.
Islam has its own specific method of study. Following this method alone produces the result
which is the effect of the study. This method mandates that the information be studied to be
practised, the one who studies it should receive this information intellectually and effectively and
in a way effecting his sentiments making him feel the life and its responsibilities based on this
dynamic thought, This will produce in the individual the warmth, enthusiasm, deep thinking and
broad knowledge simultaneously, so that the implementation of what has been studied becomes

natural. This method, besides building both deep understanding in the individual and the
capability to communicate and carry it in an effective manner, it broadens the horizon of the
individual and connects it with his emotions. This provides the individual with everything he
needs to address the affairs of his daily life. Therefore, the abstract study for the sake of
knowledge only should be avoided. such a study would make the individual turn into just a book.
Also this study should not be abstract preaching and a set of do’s and don’ts, otherwise it
becomes shallow and void of the dynamism of Iman. Similarly the one who wants to study Islam
should not consider the process as only academic knowledge and theoretical preaching. If viewed
as such it will be harmful to the real action for change. It will distract people away from the real
action and turn it into a handicap.
To achieve the objective of change for which the action was performed, it should be conceived
that achieving this objective requires seriousness and attention, full compliance with the
obligation placed upon by the party in addition to the obligations placed by Islam. Islam has
ordered us to perform specific obligations and refrain from certain things covering financial,
physical and emotional aspects. Amongst such obligations, some are compulsory and obligatory
on everybody, and some are above the compulsory (fards) and obligatory (wajib), fulfilled
optionally by those who seek intellectual and spiritually with the intention of getting closer to
Allah(SWT). Fulfilling these obligations is necessary to achieve the objective. Therefore, each
one should be determined forcing himself to fulfil the compulsory obligations in all their aspects:
financial, physical and emotional, in order to seek the hope towards achieving the objective of
change.
(The Starting Point)

In order that the action be productive it is necessary to define the place where to commence the
action, and the people with which the work is to be started. Indeed Islam is universal and views
to all humanity and humans as being equal. In the Da’awa it gives no weight to the difference of
environment, situation and place etc. Islam considers all mankind having the ability to embrace
the da’awa, and it considers Muslims responsible for carrying this da’awa to all of mankind. But,
despite this, the initiation to carry Islam does not start globally, for if such a start is undertaken it
will fail and will not lead to any result. Instead, it should start with the individual, and end with
the world. Therefore, the da’awa should be carried in a place where it has the potential to be well
established and becomes the starting point. This place, or any other place where the da’awa was
established is then considered as a launching point from which the da’awa will proceed on its
course. This place or other places, are then considered as the established point in which the state
will be established. The da’awa being well established in this will then proceed in its natural
way: the way of jihad. it must be known that although the places are taken as locations for action
in every point, it is the da’awa, not the place, which transfers from one point to another and the
da’awa transfers simultaneously in all the places where it works. Though it is necessary to define
a place to be the starting point and then the launching point and the establishment point defining
the place at each point of these three points however is not within the sphere which man controls,
because the individual will not be able to predict one of these three points. This issue is within
the sphere which controls man. Man should proceed in his action within the sphere which he
controls. Whereas the actions which are in the other sphere will occur according to the will and
decree of Allah (SWT).
With regards to defining the starting point, it is surely the place where the man lives in whose
mind the first light of the da'awa is manifested and whom Allah has prepared to convey it. More
than one individual may share the same feeling and ambition, but the man whom Allah has given

the quality to convey the da'awa would not be known until he proceeds and starts. The da'awa
starts then in the place where he lives, and that place would be the starting point.
The Launching Point
The definition of the place which will be the launching point depends on the readiness of the
society because societies are not the same in their thoughts, emotions and systems. Therefore the
place in which the society is better and the atmosphere is conducive towards the new idea
becomes a launching point. More likely the place which was the starting point will be the
launching point. However this is not consequential, since the most favourable place to be the
launching point is that in which the political and economic oppression prevails, and where heresy
and corruption become excessive and prevalent.
With regards to the Establishment point, it depends on the success of the da'awa in a specific
society. The place in which the da'awa does not create impact on the society and could not create
a suitable environment for itself, this place not suitable to become an establishment point
regardless of how great the number of the people who embrace the ideology. However, the place
in which the idea and the method are embraced by the society and dominate its environment, is
suitable to be a establishment point, irrespective of the number of people who embrace the
ideology.
Those who carry the da’awa should not measure the impact of the da’awa by the number of those
who carry it. Such measurement is utterly wrong and harmful to the da’awa because it distracts
the da'awa carriers from focusing from the society to the individual. This will causes the dawah
to become sluggish, and perhaps will be a failure in that place. The reason behind this is that the
society is not composed of individuals as many people think. Rather the individuals are parts of
the group (community). What binds these individuals in the society are other components such as
thoughts, emotions and systems. Da'awa is carried in order to change the thoughts, emotions and
systems. Consequently, da’awa addresses the masses and society not the individuals. Changing
and building the individuals is only to make them become part of a group(block) that carries the
da'awa to the society. Those who carry the Da’awa with such a deep understanding count on the
society to carry the Da'awa to it. They will consider that changing the individual will not lead to
change in the society. It will not even guarantee a permanent change to the individual. Instead,
changing the individual comes through changing the society, for once the society is changed, the
individual will change. Therefore, the focus of the da'awa should be directed towards the society
at large following the principle: "Change of society, will lead to change of the individual
constantly."
The society is similar to water in a large kettle: If anything which causes the temperature to drop
is placed beneath or around the kettle then the water freezes and transforms into ice. Similarly, if
corrupted ideologies are introduced into the society then it would freeze on corruption and
continue in deterioration and decline. However if a contradictory ideology were introduced into
society, then inconsistency and incoherence would appear in it, the shallowness would continue
to manifest everywhere in it.. And if flaming heat was put under the kettle, the water would warm
then boil becoming a stirring driving vapour. Similarly, if the correct ideology was introduced
into the society it would be a flame whose heat would transform the society to the boiling point,
then to a dynamic force. It then applies the ideology and carries its da’awa to other societies i.e.
Although the transformation of the society from one state and condition to an opposing state
cannot be noticed just like the changing of the water in the kettle is not noticed, those who aware
of the society and have confidence that the ideology which they carry burns and enlightens know

that the society is in a state of transformation, and it will definitely reach the boiling point and a
movement and dynamism; Therefore, they’ll be the watchful eye over the societies.
As a matter of fact the place which will be suitable to become the Establishment point cannot be
known because it depends on the situation and readiness of the society, and not solely on the
strength of the da’awa in that place. The Islamic da’awa in Mecca was strong, and although it
was the starting point for the da’awa, and was also suitable to become a launching point - the
Da’awa was consequently launched there, - yet it was not suitable to become an Establishment
point. Rather, it was Madinah which became the Establishment point to which the Messenger of
Allah(saw) migrated after being ensured and satisfied about the society there. He established in it
the state which launched forth with the strength of the da’awa to the different regions of the Arab
peninsula, and later to the different parts of the world.
Accordingly, we can say that the carriers of the da’awa will not be able to know the place which
would be suitable to become a launching point, nor that which fits to become an establishment
point, nor would be able to identify it, regardless of their intelligence and analysis. Only Allah
(SWT) is aware of this and therefore, the da’awa carriers should be on none but one thing as
their Iman, belief in Allah (SWT). Also all their effort should be built only on this belief not
anything else, because the focus will be through this Iman only.
The belief in Allah(SWT) requires that the true concept of Tawakhul(trust and dependence)be
always present as well as seeking the help from Him. He(SWT) alone knows the secret what is
hidden, and He(SWT) is the one who grants the da’awa carriers the success and guides them
towards the right path. Therefore, it is necessary to have strong Iman, and complete tawakhul on
Allah as well as continuous seeking of help from Him. Iman requires from the believer to believe
in the ideology, that is Iman in Islam, because it is from Allah (SWT). It is necessary that this
conviction be firmly established without any doubt, or the least possibility of any doubt in it.
This is because the slightest doubt in the ideology will lead to failure. It could even lead to kufr
and revolt against the ideology, Allah forbid.
This strong undoubted Iman is an inevitable matter for the da’awa carriers. This Iman that
guarantees the continuity of progress of the da’awa in the right and correct way. This Iman
makes it obligatory that the Da’awa be open, challenging everything, the customs and norms, the
wrong thoughts and the distorted concepts, challenging even the public opinion if it is wrong,
even if it has to struggle against it, challenging the creeds and the dogmas regardless of the
stubbornness and bigotry of its adherents. Therefore, the da’awa based on the Islamic Aqeeda is
distinguished by frankness, daring, strength, thought and the challenge to everything that
disagrees with the idea and the method(ideology) and exposing its fallacy, irrespective of the
consequences and circumstances and of whether the ideology agrees or disagrees with the
masses, and whether the people accept it, or reject and oppose it. Therefore, the carrier of the
da’awa does not flatter the people, nor compromise with them. He does not adulate the ruler or
influential people in the society, nor does he court them, rather he adheres to the ideology and to
it alone without giving any consideration for anything else. Moreover, this belief mandates that
the sovereignty belongs to the ideology alone, i.e., to Islam alone than to any other thing, and to
consider other ideologies as kufr, no matter how diverse and numerous these ideologies are; (Lo!
Deen with Allah is Islam). From the Islamic point of view whoever disbelieves in Islam is a kafir.
Therefore, it is absolutely forbidden for Islamic da’awa carriers to say to those who adopt other
than Islam, whether it is a religion or an ideology: “to adhere to their ideology or religion”.
Rather, it is necessary to call them to Islam through Hikmah and rational evidence and in a way

affecting to their heart and brain. This is because the da’awa requires from its carriers to work to
assure the sovereignty for Islam alone. Leaving non-Muslims to what they believe in does not
mean acknowledgement of their beliefs and religions, rather it is in response to the order of
Allah(SWT), who prohibits to use force against people to make them embrace Islam. It is Allah’s
order which obliges us to leave the individuals to their creeds, beliefs and rituals, as long as it is
restricted to their personal not public affairs, provided that they have no distinct entity within the
entity of Islam. Therefore, Islam does not permit the existence of non-Islamic political parties or
block formations that are established on a basis contradicting Islam, and it allows parties and
block formations within the limits of Islam. Thus, the belief in the ideology necessitates that the
ideology alone will be the reference in the society without anything else.
Iman in Islam is different from understanding its laws and legislation. The Iman in Islam is
established through the intellect or through an evidence proven by the intellect. Therefore there
is no room for any doubt in it. Where as understanding the laws and legislation does not depend
on the mind alone but also on knowing the Arabic language, on having the ability to derive the
Hukm, its Daleel as well as to scrutinise the authenticity of the Hadith. Therefore, the da’awa
carriers should consider their understanding of the rules as correct, with the possibility that they
may be wrong, and the understanding of other people to the rules as wrong, with the possibility
that they may be correct. They can then proceed with the da’awa for Islam and its rules according
to their understanding and deriving of them, and try to change the opinion of others which they
consider wrong, but possibly correct, to adopt their own understanding which they consider
correct but possibly wrong. Therefore, it is totally incorrect for the da’awa carriers to view his
opinion as if it is “The Only” opinion of Islam, rather they have to present their opinion as an
Islamic opinion. The mujtahids who established the schools of Fiqh (madhabs) used to consider
their deriving of the rules as correct but with the possibility of it being wrong. Each one of them
used to say: "If a hadith was correct then it will be my madhab, and don’t consider my opinion”.
Likewise the carriers of the da’awa should also consider their opinion which they adopt or derive
from Islam, on the basis of this said understanding, as correct. However, their belief in Islam as
an Aqeeda must not contain any doubt whatsoever. Such attitude towards the da’awa carriers
regarding their understanding is because the Da’awa implants in their souls the yearning towards
perfection, and mandates them to continuously explore the truth, and scrutinise whatever they
know or understand, such a process will purify their knowledge from any possible alien idea, and
remove away from it anything which has the potential to be considered part of it if it remained
closer to it, thus the understanding remains sound and the thinking deep. Consequently, the idea
will remain pure and clear. because they will truly be able to perform the da’awa as long as the
idea remains pure and clear. The purity of the thought and the clarity of the method are the only
guarantee for its success and continuity.
However Da’awa carriers exploring for the truth and continuously seeking the correct idea, does
not, in any way, mean that their understanding is not firmly established. It should remain firm,
because it emanates from a deep thinking. Indeed, it is more established than any other
understanding. Hence, the Da’awa carriers should be wary of their da’awa and their
understanding, cautious not to be distracted or diverted from this understanding by others. For
this diversion is the most dangerous thing in the da’awa. Therefore, Allah warned His Prophet
(SAW) of this: He said to him, "Beware of them lest they seduce you from some part of that
which Allah revealed to you". It is reported that Omar(ra) said to his judge Shuraih when he
advised only to judge according to the book of Allah, he said to him "Don't let the people turn
you away from it". Therefore, the da’awa carriers should be aware of a word which contradicts
Islam though from a sincere person, or any opinion viewed by a person caring for the da’awa and
trying to impose it under the pretext of maslaha though it contradicts Islam. So they should be

aware of this and not allow anybody to do such a thing. If such a thing happens, then it will be a
clear deviation.
It is necessary to differentiate between the Da’awa to Islam and the da’awa to resume the Islamic
way of life, and also to differentiate between the da’awa carried by a group as an Islamic group
in an Ummah (nation) and the da’awa which is carried by the Islamic state.
The differentiation between the da’awa to Islam and the da’awa to resume an Islamic way of life
is to define the objective for which the da’awa proceeds. The Da’awa to Islam is carried to non-
Muslims who are invited to embrace Islam and enter its domain under its sphere of influence.
The practical method to invite these people is to be governed by Islam by the Islamic state, so as
to see the light of Islam. They’ll be invited to Islam through the manifestation of its creeds and its
legislation so as to appreciate the greatness of Islam. Therefore, it is necessary that the call to
Islam be carried by the Islamic state.
Regarding the Da’awa to resume an Islamic way of life, it must be carried by a group not
individuals. This da’awa to resume an Islamic way of life is summarised as follows: the society
individuals, by their majority, are Muslims but not governed by Islam is a non-Islamic society,
i.e. Dar kufr (land of kufr).The da’awa in this society is carried to establish the Islamic state to
implement Islam in it and carries the Islamic da’awa to other societies. This is the case when
there is no Islamic state. However if there is an Islamic state that implements Islam completely,
the da’awa is carried in that society so that it becomes part of the Islamic state's territory, so as to
be governed through the state by Islam, and to become part of it. It will carry the Islamic da’awa,
in order that it becomes an Islamic society on which the definition of Dar al-Islam (land of Islam)
will be applicable. It is not permitted for a Muslim to live in Dar Kufr and rather in case the Dar
al-Islam in which he lives becomes Dar Kufr, he must work to make it Dar al-Islam, or emigrate
to Dar al-Islam.
In differentiating between the da’awa carried by a group within an Islamic Ummah, and the
da’awa carried by an Islamic state, is important for order to know the type of action to be
undertaken by The Dawah carriers. The da’awa carried by the Islamic state is represented by the
practical aspect. The state implements Islam internally and completely and its totality, so that the
Muslims will enjoy their life, and the non-Muslims who live in Dar al-Islam will perceive its
light and embrace Islam freely and willingly, after accepting and being satisfied by it. And the
state carries the da’awa externally not only by way of presentation and explanation of the rules of
Islam, but also by preparing the necessary force for jihad in the way of Allah, so as to rule the
neighbouring territories with Islam as well. Ruling them accordingly is considered the practical
method of the da’awa, and it is the method performed by the Messenger (SAW), and the
Khalifahs after him until the end of the Islamic state. Therefore, carrying the da’awa by the state
is the practical aspect of the da’awa internally and externally.
As for the da’awa carried by a group or block formation all of its actions are limited to the
intellectual aspect and not related to any other types of action. Therefore, it takes the intellectual
aspect not the practical aspect. The group carries out what shar'ia has mandated upon it in such a
situation, till it is able to establish the Islamic state, which will start the practical aspect. Thus,
Dawah is geared towards Muslims, to understand Islam in order to resume the Islamic way of life
and it stands firmly against whoever opposes this Da’awa using the means necessary in its
struggle.

The life of the Messenger (SAW) in Mecca should be taken as a model to follow in the Da’awa.
Therefore, the da’awa should first proceed by first understanding it and perform all the
obligations defined by Islam, as was the case in the House of Al-Arqam. Then, those who have
studied and understood Islam and sincerely believed in it will move to interact with the Ummah,
until the Ummah understands Islam and realises the necessity of the establishment of the Islamic
state. The block should take the initiative by addressing the corruption of the people, and
challenging them in their erroneous concepts and corrupt opinions. The reality of Islam and the
essence of its da’awa have to be then demonstrated and explained, so that the public awareness
about the da’awa is established and the Dawah carriers be considered as part of the Ummah. No
gap should be between them, so that the Ummah as a whole carries this productive effort under
the leadership of the block carrying the da’awa, until they assume authority and bring the Islamic
state into existence. Then the life of the Prophet (SAW) in Medina should be the model to follow
in the implementation of Islam and in carrying the da’awa to it. Therefore, the Islamic block
which carries the da’awa has nothing to do with the aspects of implementation of Islam(which is
the duty of the state), and does not occupy itself with anything other than the Da’awa, and it
considers the involvement in any other action other than the da’awa as a distraction, delaying the
da’awa. Accordingly the group is absolutely not allowed to engage in it. The Messenger (SAW)
used to call for Islam in Mecca while it was full with vile and immorality. He did not do anything
physical to remove it. The tyranny and oppression, poverty and need were quite apparent, and it
was narrated that he did not perform any action to ease or remove these things. He would pray in
the Ka'aba, while the idols were above his head, but he didn’t destroy any of them.. All he did
was to undermine the Meccans’ gods, belittle their thinking, expose their actions as erroneous
and restrict himself to verbal and to the intellectual aspect. However, when he had established the
state, and opened Mecca, he did not tolerate any of the idols, nor fornication (fisq) and fujoor,
nor oppression or suppression, nor poverty or need he removed them all.
Therefore, the block, while it carries the da’awa, is not allowed to practice, as a group, any other
actions other than the intellectual aspect of the Da’awa. The individuals however are not
prevented from performing what they like of the charitable deeds, but the group does not perform
these, since its function is to establish a state to carry the Da’awa.
Though the life of the Messenger (SAW) in Mecca has to be taken as the model to follow in the
da’awa, one must notice the difference between the people of Mecca and calling them to Islam,
and the Muslims nowadays and calling them to resume an Islamic way of life. The Messenger
(SAW) used to call Kuffar to Islam, while the Da’awa nowadays is to call Muslims to understand
Islam and to act according to it. Therefore, the da’awa nowadays is much more easier (and
approachable).
The block must not consider itself as a different entity separated from the Ummah. Rather it has
to consider itself a part of this Ummah, because people are Muslims like the block members. The
members of the block are not better than any one of the Muslims. The fact that they understood
Islam and work for it doesn’t make them better but rather it places a heavier responsibility upon
them, and more harder accountability in front of Allah for their care taking of Muslims and
working for Islam. The members of the Islamic group should know that they are worthless if they
are separated from the Ummah regardless of their size. Consequently their duty is to interact with
the Ummah, and to proceed along together with her in the struggle, ensuring that the Ummah
feels that she is the one who is working all together. The block (party) has to stay away from any
action, any word and any remark that would imply that the block is separated from the Ummah,
regardless of its degree, If this happens, it will alienate the Ummah from it and from its da’awa,
and will make the block an added obstacle in the set of obstacles in front of the revival. So the

Ummah is an indivisible entity, and the block strives to establish the state and to be the guard for
Islam in the Ummah and within the state, assuring that no deviation can take place. If it notices
any decline in the Ummah, it will rectify it, it will instigate in the Ummah the Islamic Aqueeda
and the Ummah’s creativity in applying Islam. And if the party notices any deviation in the state
then it will work with the Ummah to rectify it on the basis of Islamic rules. Therefore, the
Da’awa carried by this group will successfully proceed in its natural way with excellence.
Consequently, the objective of the group should be to resume the Islamic way of life in the
Islamic Lands, and to carry the Islamic da’awa to the world. Its method to achieve this objective
is to rule (government). Its method to achieve at the ruling requires (1) study and comprehending
of Islam, and to culture people in a way resulting in the formation of the Islamic mentality
(aqliya) and the Islamic behaviour (nafsiya), so as to build the Islamic personality (shaksiya), and
also (2) interact with the Ummah by making her aware of Islam and realising her true interests
and the Islamic outlook towards them and to secure their achievement. (3) adopting the interests
of the Ummah, ensuring that the interaction and struggle in the way of the da’awa proceed
simultaneously with the study process.
This action of the party block is political, therefore it is necessary that the political dimension of
the party should be obvious. This will be the first practical step towards the party block’s Da’awa
calls for Islam. However, this does not mean the da’awa is for politics alone or for ruling for its
sake. Rather it means the da’awa is for Islam, and to the political struggle to acquire complete
authority in order to establish the state which will implement Islam and carry the Da’awa. As a
matter of fact, the block which carries the Islamic da’awa should be political. It should not be
spiritual or ethical or academic or educational, nor any of these. It must be a political block.
Accordingly, Hizb ut-Tahrir, which is a party based on Islam, is a political party, which deal with
politics, and works to culture the Ummah with the Islamic culture in which the political aspect is
prominently manifested. The party condemns what the colonialists and their agents are doing by
preventing the students from engaging in politics, attempting to distance the masses from it as
well. The party views the necessity of engaging in politics by the masses having the political
culture becoming a prominent feature among them. Political activity does not mean to show that
Islam includes politics, nor that the political principles in Islam are such and such. Politics means
to take care of the affairs of the whole Ummah internally and externally, and to be conducted on
the basis of Islam alone. This should be done by the state, and by the Ummah which accounts the
state. To achieve this practically, the party itself must undertake the responsibility in the Ummah
and in political authority. Therefore, Hizb ut-Tahrir carries the da’awa for Islam
comprehensively, and cultures the Ummah with the Ahkam Shari’ah addressing the daily life’s
problems. The Hizb works in order to have Islamic rules exclusively, and strives against the
Kafir colonialists to uproot their influence. It also struggles against the agents of colonialism,
whether they were those who adopt its intellectual leadership and ideology or those who
implement its policy and thoughts.
Carrying the Islamic da’awa, and the political struggle for its cause, can be undertaken only in
the society which the party has defined as the area (majal) for activity. Hizb ut-Tahrir considers
the society in all the Islamic world as one society, because its entire case is in one case, i.e.
Islam. But it takes the Arab speaking lands being part of the Islamic Lands as a starting point. It
considers the establishment of an Islamic state in the Arab speaking countries, as a nucleus for
the Islamic state, as a natural step in this procedure.

The society in the Islamic world is politically deteriorated, and most of it was occupied by the
western states. It is still dominated by them despite the pseudo independence. Subjected
completely to the democratic capitalist ideological leadership. In government and politics it is
ruled by the pseudo democracy in economics, by capitalism, in the military field, it is shackled
by the foreigners’ weapons, training and expertise. In the exterior policy the Muslim World
follows the West who dominate it. Therefore, we can claim that the so called Islamic countries
are still colonised and that colonialism is still deep-rooted in them, because colonialism is the
imposition of military, political, economical, and cultural will on the people to exploit them.
Colonialism deploys all its forces in order to impose its ideological leadership and to consolidate
its viewpoint about life. The different forms of colonialism include (1) annexing the colonised
countries and establishing settlements and colonising them, and (2) establishing pseudo
governments, nominally independent yet practically subject to the colonialist state. This is the
current situation in the Muslim world, which is subjected to the western hegemony. The Muslims
in the Muslim World proceed in their education Curricula according to the western colonialist
programmes. Despite its subjugation to the domination of western colonialism. The Muslim
world is at the same time a target for the Soviet invasion. The Soviet Union works in the Muslim
world through its agents who call for communism, by trying to establish its ideological
leadership and its viewpoint about life, and the communist ideology.
Accordingly, the countries in the Muslim World are colonised by the western states, and have
become a platform for the foreign ideological leaderships. They are also the target of the Soviet
Union who aim at their invasion and occupation, not to colonise them but rather to transform
them into communist countries, and to transfer the whole society into a communist society where
all signs of Islam will be wiped off.
Consequently, it is necessary that political work be undertaken to struggle against the current
colonialism, and fight its ideological leaderships. We should also work to protect our lands from
the foreign invasion which targets them. As to the Soviet onslaught, its danger is not now visible
politically, though it exists. Their threat is restricted to those who carry and call for its
ideological leadership in the lands. They take advantage of the political and economical
oppression that befalls upon us from western colonialism, so as to establish the communist
leadership. Therefore, the struggle against the Western colonialism leads to automatically fight
the dangers of the Soviet invasion. Carrying of the Islamic da’awa in the correct manner will
stand against the danger of the Western ideological leadership. Thus, the cornerstone of political
struggle should be directed towards the Western Imperialism.
The Political struggle requires seeking no assistance from the foreigner regardless of his
nationality, and regardless of the form of assistance. Any political assistance from any foreigner,
and any promotion for him is considered a betrayal to the Ummah. Political struggle also
necessitates work to build the internal entity of the Islamic world In a sound manner, so that it
becomes an leading power with a distinct entity, and a sublime society. This power will work to
take the leadership from both camps in order to carry the Islamic da’awa to the entire world and
maintain its leadership. Political struggle requires also to stand against the western laws and
legislation and all forms of colonialism, rejecting western plans, particularly the British and
American, whether they are technical and financial, or political. It also necessitates the total
rejection of the western civilisation, but meaning not to reject the material aspects of culture,
since the Madanaya (material aspect of culture) can be taken as they are the result of science and
technology. It requires also the uprooting the foreign ideological leadership. Rejection of the
foreign culture which contradicts the Islamic viewpoint. This does not include science because it

is universal. This must be taken from because it is of the most important factor in the material
progress in life.
Political struggle requires from us to be aware of the western colonialists, especially the British
and Americans, that they embark upon every colonised country to help their agents, those who
are passive and reactionary, those who enjoy to live in the darkness and those who advocate their
policies and ideological leadership, as well as the ruling class. These colonialists do everything
to provide assistance to these agents in different regions to obstruct this Islamic movement. The
West will provide agents with funds and other help in order to destroy this movement. The
colonialists, together with their agents, will embark on bearing the banner of a slandering
campaign against this Islamic liberation movement, by accusing it falsely of charges: it is being
employed by the colonialists, or inciting the internal disorder and feuds, or working to unify the
whole world against the Muslims, or it is contradicting with Islam, etc. Therefore, those who are
involved in the struggle should be aware of the colonialists’ policy and of its styles and should be
able to expose the colonialist plans internally and externally in due time. Exposing the colonialist
plans in due time is considered the most important types of struggle.
Therefore, Hizb ut-Tahrir, works to liberate the Islamic lands from all types of colonialism. It
stands against colonialism without forbearance and it does not seek physical evacuation of these
lands, nor their deceptive independence only, rather it works for uprooting the situations which
the kafir colonialists have established, by liberating the lands, the institutions, and the thoughts
from occupation, whether it be military, intellectual, cultural, economical or other. Hizb stands
against anyone who defends or advocates any aspect of colonialism, so as to resume the Islamic
way of life, by establishing the Islamic state, which carries the message of Islam to the whole
world. We ask Allah, and pray to Him that He provides us with his help from Him, so as to carry
out these heavy responsibilities. Truly He is As-Samee’a, Al-Mujeeb.
HIZB UT-TAHRIR
Hizb ut-Tahrir is a political party, whose ideology is Islam, and its goal is to resume the Islamic
way of life by establishing The Islamic state which implements Islam and carries its da’awa to
the world. The party has developed a party culture which includes Islamic rules about life's
affairs. The party calls for Islam as an ideological leadership from which emanates the system
which addresses all man's problems whether political, economical, cultural, social and others. It
is a political party which includes within its membership men as well as women, and it calls all
peoples to Islam and to adopt its concepts and system. The party views them, no matter how
numerous their nationalities and schools of thought are, from the Islamic outlook. It relies on the
interaction with the Ummah to achieve its goal. It stands against colonialism in all its forms and
names to liberate the Ummah from its intellectual leadership and to uproot its cultural, political,
military, and economical influence from the soil of the Islamic lands. To change the erroneous
and distorted concepts, which colonialism had disseminated, which is to restrict Islam to personal
worship and morals.

Concepts

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Concepts

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CONCEPTS

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 1

Reason for the Failure to Achieve Revival

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 2

Other Reasons in the 19th Century

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 3

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 4

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 5

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 6

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 7

Spirit, Spirituality and Spiritual Aspect

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 8

Or as Gibreel (peace be upon him);

Or as the law of Allah, Shari’ah;

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 9

Al Qada Wal Qadar

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 10

Husn and Qubh.

Difference Between Khair and Sharr, and Husn and Qubh

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 11

Value of the Action

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 12

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 13

The Doctrine and Systems

Islam Organises Man's Life as a Human Being

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 14

Divine Rules and the Illah(legal reason)

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 15

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 16

Mans Actions and Illah(legal reasoning)

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 17

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 18

The Legislative Sources

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 19

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 20

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 21

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 22

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 23

Sensation and thought

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 24

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 25

(The Starting Point)

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 26

The Launching Point

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 27

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 28

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 29

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 30

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 31

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 32

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 33

Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir 34

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen