Using Material Force as a Method For Revival


The Muslims are in a crisis situation. While Islam may exist as ideas in the minds of Muslims and in the form of some rules and rituals that Muslims submit to as individuals, Islam as a system of life does not exist. And as a result of this absence, the Muslim Ummah is plagued with problems, and the world continues to suffer. It is known among Muslims that Islam is the system from Allah and, hence, Islam is the only correct and valid system that must be applied. It is also known by many Muslims that the responsibility of establishing Islam and carrying Islam to the people is an obligation upon all Muslims. However, what is not agreed upon is how to establish this Islamic system. Many voices are presented to the Muslims, each one claiming that they are on the correct road to revival and change. One such call that has been well received by many Muslims is the call to change the situation and establish Islam by material struggle, or the process of changing the status quo and establishing Islam by force of arms.

Many groups and movements have been established and operate on this premise, and they are many and varied. Most of these groups and movements (if not all of them), support their action using two primary evidences: First, that jihad is an obligation upon every Muslim, and second, that the existing regimes in the Muslim world, by failing to implement Islam, are Kaffir and hence, must be fought against.

In spite of the sincerity of those who may be pushing for such an approach, the approach itself is not correct for several reasons:

1). As Muslims, we are obligated to follow the method of the Prophet (saaws) in carrying out any obligation. For example, the Quran says, Establish the Salat, and hence, prayer is an obligation. But the Prophet (saaws) says in one hadith,:Pray the way you see me praying. Similarly, establishing the Islamic system is an obligation, and we must look to the manner in which the Prophet (saaws) worked to change the setup of the society from a non-Islamic one to an Islamic society. Surveying the life of the Prophet (saaws) shows clearly that the Prophet (saaws) did not engage in any type of material action in Mecca while he was working to establish the Islamic system. It was only when the Islamic system was established, and the Islamic state was in place, that the Prophet (saaws) carried out material actions. Even when the Prophet (saaws) himself was being persecuted and his Companions were being tortured, the Prophet (saaws) refrained from carrying out any material action. Rather, the Dawah was both intellectual aimed at changing the thinking of individuals and the society, as well as political, in order to establish the political entity that would implement the Islamic system. And hence, the nature of the struggle was a political and intellectual one, not a physical clash between his group and the Meccan authority.

2). When Allah legislated the Islamic rules, He did not reveal them to be applied in a vacuum. Every Islamic rule has a specific method to apply that rule. For example, Muslims to not pray in any manner they see fit or in any context. Rather, the prayer must be done according to a specific method, which includes the times of prayer, the movements of the prayer, and specific things that must be said during each part of the prayer, and what is required before the prayer (ablution, etc.). Also, Allah (swt) legislated the Hajj, but the Hajj must be applied according to a specific method, which includes the requirements for Hajj (to be in a state of ihram, free of debts, etc)., what time of year to perform Hajj, and the specific actions carried out at each phase of the Hajj. Similarly, Allah (swt) legislated the jihad, and it is not up to us to decide how and when to perform jihad as we see fit. Rather, Allah (swt) legislated, along with the jihad, a specific method to carry out this obligation, which includes when to perform jihad, who is authorized to perform jihad, and the requirements for the jihad.

After a comprehensive survey of the Islamic legislative sources, one finds that the Shariah definition of jihad is the last stage of the Islamic foreign policy in which the Islamic State utilizes diplomacy and force to remove barriers that obstruct the Dawah of Islam from reaching the people. Therefore, the jihad is not used in order to establish an Islamic State or to change the status quo; rather, the jihad is a tool used by the Islamic State for a specific purpose. Furthermore, the Prophet (saaws) never waged jihad as an emir of a group; hence, there was never any jihad group in Islam. The Prophet (saaws) always waged jihad either as a Head of State or a Commander of an Army, and both necessitate the existence of the Islamic State. And Allah (swt) did not legislate jihad as an obligation to be carried out by a specific group. Rather, Allah (swt) legislated jihad as an obligation for the entire Muslim Ummah, and the only way to organize the resources of an entire Ummah to carry out an obligation is to establish a system with a state that can mobilize the masses in such a coherent manner.

 'witness over Mankind'

We made you the just Ummah so that you may be witnesses over humankind, and the Messenger (saw) is a witness over you. [ 2:143]

Also, one needs to consider the following: The Islamic foreign policy consists of three stages, all of which must be carried out in order - the invitation to Islam; followed by the offer to be ruled by Islam and protection by the Islamic State, in return for the Jizya; and finally, the jihad, in order to remove the obstacles before the Dawah, should the first two options be rejected by another state. We must keep in mind that the ''invitation'' that the Islamic State extends is to ISLAM, and not just to the Aqeedah of Islam. The invitation to Islam is not a missionary-style invitation of individuals carrying Islam to individuals. Rather, the invitation is to Islam, meaning the COMPLETE SYSTEM OF ISLAM. And the way you ''invite'' others to a complete system is by first applying the system in the life for others to witness. And applying the Islamic System can only be done by the Islamic State; only then can we say that we are ''inviting'' others to Islam. Also, the second option that the Islamic State presents to the others, which is the jizya in return for being ruled by Islam and receiving the  protection of the State, by default requires the presence of the Islamic State. How can a group collect the jizya? The jizya is a tax, and collecting taxes is the job of a political authority. Also, in return for the jizya, Muslims must rule the people by Islam and give them protection. Ruling and protecting entire nations can only be done by a political authority. Thus, because the first two stages of the Islamic foreign policy require the presence of the Islamic State, then the last stage (the jihad), must require the existence of the State.

3) As for taking up arms against the regimes on the basis that such regimes are not applying Islam, the argument that is used is based on two points: First, the existing regimes, but abandoning the ruling of Islam, have declared apostasy and are apostates, and therefore, they must be fought against; Second, the Prophet (saaws) indicated in one hadith that the ruler can be fought against and removed by force if he implements Kufr. Both of these evidences are not applicable to this issue because the punishment for apostasy, like any Islamic rule, has its method of application which cannot be separated from the rule itself. In order to punish an individual for apostasy, he must be convicted in an Islamic court by an Islamic judge appointed by a legal Islamic ruler, who himself must be selected by the Ummah. This procedure requires the presence of an Islamic system. Also, during the Dawah of the Prophet (saaws), many individuals reverted away from Islam. When he returned from Isra wal-Miraj, many people who became Muslims reverted back to Kufr, yet no punishment was meted out to him. In addition, the Prophet (saaws) never punished anyone for apostasy or any other crime except as a Head of State or a as Judge operating within the Islamic State. As for the hadith allowing the Muslims to take up arms against a ruler should he apply non-Islam, this hadith applies to the situation where there already exists an Islamic system and only the Khalifah or ruler deviates. However, the current situation goes far beyond the ruler; the entire setup of the societies in the Muslim world are non-Islamic. Therefore, the situation that applies today is analogous to the situation of the Muslims in Mecca, where the entire society was based on Kufr, and not just a situation where the ruler was not implementing Islamic rules.

Aside from these Shariah points, if one looks at material groups from what is called a realistic perspective, one will find that such groups suffer from many deficiencies, in particular the following:

A). The nature of the type of struggle that material groups carry out does not address the thinking of the people. Therefore, their actions do not contribute in any meaningful way towards rebuilding the thinking of the Muslim Ummah. Simply rallying the Muslims to take up arms or take material action without addressing their thinking will not solve the problem, and it may even prove dangerous.

B). Most of these material groups appeal to the emotions of the people, mobilizing the masses under the banner of jihad. However, this concept of jihad is usually called for in a superficial manner. Such groups typically rush forward with zeal, build up a brief momentum based on emotion and anger, and then fizzle out, leaving behind an exhausted Ummah and a trail of bitter failure. Such a sequence of events often leads the people to either relent to despair and give up hope, or to 'accept reality' by treading down the path of compromise.

C). The nature of the struggle that such groups embark upon is a group or party verses a state/regime, which is highly disproportionate. A group or party has only the resources of its individuals, whereas a state  even a small state like Israel  has an entire infrastructure, an industrial base, heavy industry, an army, a command and control structure, and a system to mobilize its resources and citizenry. Because of this disproportionate relationship, oftentimes, the group or party engaging in material struggle are prone to seeking assistance from other regimes, sometimes from the very regime it is fighting against, which makes them prone to being used by other powers to achieve political ends. And the moment that a group accepts assistance from another power, then it has surrendered its political will to that power. In instances where it appears that a group or party actually defeated a regime or power, closer observation will show that such a group was given assistance or backed up by another regime. It is no secret that the movement in Afghanistan, which repelled the Soviet Union, was backed fully by the US, and many of the leaders of that movement had direct ties to the CIA. And all the problems that emerged in Afghanistan since then had its beginnings the moment they accepted to side with the US.

It is true that Allah (swt) supports the Believers and that He gives victory to the Muslims; however, this victory and support is conditional that the Muslims follow His Orders. And part of obeying Allah is recognizing that Allah also created cause and effect. For this reason, Allah (swt) ordered the Muslims to prepare when He said: And prepare all that you can so that you alert the Enemy of Allah and your enemy. It is also true that Muslims can overcome the Kuffar if they are disadvantaged; however, this disadvantageous ratio must also be realistic and within the rules of cause and effect that Allah created. An army of 300 soldiers facing an army of 1000 better equipped soldiers in Badr is a situation where the Muslims are at a disadvantage, but it is not unrealistic and beyond the realm of Cause and Effect. In this situation, both the Muslims and the Kuffar had armies backed by a state, even though the Islamic State at the time was weaker. However, children throwing rocks against a battalion of tanks or militias with rifles against a modern air force is unrealistic and is an indication of the failure of Muslims to recognize the Law of Cause and Effect that Allah (swt) created.

The question that immediately arises is: What about the Muslims struggling in Palestine, Kashmir, and other areas? Are they expected to lay down their arms and wait until the Ummah rebuilds itself and the Islamic System materializes? Absolutely not!! No one is suggesting that, by calling Muslims to focus their efforts on rebuilding their thinking and working to establishing the Islamic System, we are asking the Muslims who are being oppressed to stand and die. It is an obligation for Muslims to defend themselves when they are threatened. In fact, this is a right that all human beings recognize and it is something that exists even among the animals. Allah (swt) created the survival instinct within us, and defending oneself and others is a natural manifestation of this instinct. What the Muslims are expected to do is to recognize what the cause of their problem is, which is the absence of Islam as a way of life  in the minds of the Muslims and in the life affairs. Hence, the Muslims, while they are defending themselves or addressing their immediate issues, should work towards rebuilding their thinking and understand Islam as a comprehensive way of life, and establish Islam as a system of life. And the nature of this work demands a momentum that is both intellectual and political. Intellectual in order to address the thinking of the Ummah, and political in order to work for the reestablishment of the Islamic system that will provide the Muslim Ummah with the engine to carry out their responsibilities and solve the problems of humanity. In fact, the priority of the Ummah should be directed to addressing this issue because resolving this issue will lead to the establishment of the platform that will resolve all other issues. What is happening now is that Muslims are either failing to address this issue and focusing entirely on dealing with the symptoms, or they are relegating the issue of establishing Islam and rebuilding the thinking of the Ummah to a position of secondary importance while concentrating the bulk of their efforts on other issues. This attitude must change, and the Muslims must not only work towards rebuilding the Islamic system and the Islamic thinking, but they must consider this issue as the most vital and central issue they have. After all, we are all aspiring to attain the Pleasure of Allah (swt), and how can we do this if we are unable to implement the Orders of Allah, even though we may know what those Orders are?

Supposing that we remove the occupation, this will not solve the problem, and the proof for this is all the ''solutions'' that are suggested by various intellectuals, discussion circles, groups, and organizations, once we are free of the occupation. If we expel the Israelis from Palestine, the common solution that we often hear is an ''democratic Palestinian state.'' We have to raise to the level where we are thinking not only of the occupation but the very cause of the occupation, and we have to make addressing the cause of the occupation the focus of our thinking.

Also, we have to realize that Hamas is a material group that utilizes material struggle to achieve its aims, and this by itself is a limitation in several regards. First, it gives the group undue exposure, thereby making it an easy and legitimate target. Also, material struggle requires vast support and armaments, especially if the target is a state like Israel. This support does not come from the Palestinian people because there is no infrastructure to produce such weapons. Therefore, the support comes from outside, namely the Palestinian Authority itself (which is itself supplied by the major powers) or by one or more of the puppet regimes. Lastly, the material struggle does not have any enduring intellectual impact on the thinking of the people; hence, it typically flares momentarily before burning itself out.

Perhaps Hamas and their likes are sincere, but regardless of their sincerity, they are only groups, and a group cannot challenge a state. You need a state to challenge another state, and the Muslims have what it takes not only to build a state but to build a state that can become a potential superpower. It is high time that Muslims understand that Allah (swt) created certain realities, and we cannot expect these realities to somehow be suspended for us.

Hamas and Hizbullah will not be able to defeat Israel, but then again if you think about it, we would not even need them. We have the  Syrian Army, the Pakistani Army, the Turkish Army, the Jordanian Army, not to mention all the natural resources and the expertise in the Muslim world. All we need is the correct understanding of Islam and confidence in our Deen, which will naturally lead to the emergence of a strong political will and a sincere leadership to organize these massive resources in the right direction. Currently, this is lacking, and for this reason, the Muslims are used as expendable tools in the dirty game that is played by the other nations. The leadership of Hamas and Hizbullah have, on several occasions, allied themselves with the existing regimes in the Muslim world, such as Syria and Jordan. The headquarters of Hamas and Hizbullah are in capital cities like Damascus and Amman, and in these countries, you do not operate a militant organization for free. In addition, they receive material support, funding, and arms from these regimes. Therefore, regardless of their sincerity, they are PART OF THE GAME. Since these regimes are all puppets to the West, then these groups and organizations carry the least political weight because they are tools of the puppets. And it is unfortunate that the Muslim masses are made to rally behind them. We fell into this trap with the PLO, and look what happened in the end.

For this reason, we have to be very stubborn when it comes to adhering to the idea(fikra) and placing Islam above all else. The case of evaluating Hamas or any other group is truly a test of our ability to adhere to the idea and to measure everything based on Islam alone.

All in all, this should make us realize the importance of having a sharp political mentality. Muslims nowadays are being used, and the political agenda of the other nations are being advanced at the expense of the blood, resources, and the efforts of Muslims. A sharp political mentality coupled with a clear understanding of Islam is our best defense. Alhamdulillah, Muslims are sincere, but the sincerity alone is not enough. In fact, if devoid of a sharp political mentality or a crystal clear understanding of Islam, then some of the greatest crimes against the Muslims and against humanity can be committed by the most sincere individuals!!!


May Allah (swt) give us the guidance and the understanding to help us understand His Deen so that we can Worship Him correctly and carry out our responsibilities

Comment

If we are going to evaluate the actions of certain individuals and groups, we should have a clear frame of reference in mind, and our evaluation should be objective and based on Islam as well as the political reality. If we allow our emotions to control us, then we are fated to remain in this dismal situation, as such a declined thinking will signal to the other nations that the Muslims can be manipulated and made to turn in any direction.

And besides this point, our central issue is not Bin Laden or even the rulers for that matter. We can go in circles debating Bin Laden or X ruler, and it will not contribute to the slightest degree towards reconstructing our thinking or building our understanding of Islam. Our most pressing issue is the absence of Islam as an ideology and a comprehensive way of life, and the absence of thinking among Muslims in general. The issue at hand (if any) should be, whether the actions of Osama Bin Ladin and Al-Qa'ida are correct from the Islamic perspective. It should be clear that neither Osama Bin Ladin nor Al-Qa'ida represent Islam as far as their actions go. Al-Qa'ida is a guerrilla movement whose actions do not contribute in any meaningful way towards reconstructing the thinking of the Muslims or building the society in a positive manner.

Further compounding the problem is the fact that Al-Qa'ida and Osama Bin Ladin are nothing but tools that are used to achieve political aims. Both are funded through regimes, in particular Saudi Arabia, and this is a well-established fact. And because Saudi Arabia itself is a puppet regime, then this reduces Al-Qa'ida and Osama Bin Ladin to the status of tools that are at the disposal of these regimes and their masters, regardless of the level of sincerity of the individuals who comprise the organization.

The document below sheds some light on this issue -

Setup of the Century 

Related

Despair