Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Taliban regime and Sharia

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The Taliban regime and Sharia


    The Taleban regime and the Shari'ah
    ===================================

    The recent destruction of the Buddha idols in Afghanistan by the Taleban regime has put the regime in the spotlight, some Muslims began to hold the opinion that the regime in Afghanistan is Islamic. There is a general lack of awareness amongst Muslims in what the Islamic state is, due to many factors. The chief factor is the fact that the great majority of Muslims never ever witnessed the Khilafah state. We have grown up in republics, kingdoms, federations, and different forms of nation states. So it is not strange to find scholars that declare the regime in Afghanistan to be Islamic. In this article we will discuss the Fatwa of Sheikh Hamoud bin Uqla of Saudi-Arabia. In this Fatwa he declared Taleban a true Islamic state, with all its affairs running in accordance to the Shari’ah. Surprisingly he states its foreign policy is Islamic.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The sheikh affirmed in his Fatwa that the qualities of an Islamic state are:

    "Firstly: Its legislation by the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (SAWS) in all the branches of ruling and other than it in other worldly dealings.

    Secondly: Indeed one of the most important components of a country is its control of land. It is well-known that the Taliban Government has over 95% of Afghanistan under its control.

    Thirdly: That its relations and dealings with other countries are established on the basis of the Noble Deen. The Taliban Regime in Afghanistan has been proven to fulfill these factors, so it is the only country in the World in which there are no man-made laws and legislations."

    This claim the Afghani government implements the Shari’ah totally cannot be further from the truth. We will see how this statement truly measures with statements of the Taleban leaders. In the Press Statement By Abdur Rahman Zahid The Deputy Foreign Minister of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan at UNCA on the occasion of the Fifty-fifth Session of the United Nations General Assembly September 21, 2000 he states the policy of Taleban regime with other countries is:

    "Based on mutual respect and non-interference, the I.E.A wishes to develop and maintain friendly relations with neighboring countries and the countries of the world. The I.E.A respects sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the nations and expects them to do the same for Afghanistan. The I.E.A does not interfere in internal affairs of any country and wants them not to interfere in internal affairs of Afghanistan."

    Rather the recent relations between Uzbekistan and Taleban have improved. Ambassadors of the two countries met. Uzbek Minister of Foreign Affairs Abdulaziz Kamilov announced after a meeting between Uzbek and Taleban ambassadors in Islamabad "Uzbekistan is prepared to enter into dialogue with whichever government is recognized by the people of Afghanistan," So the Uzbek tyrant regime now does not see the Taleban regime as a threat. This is not strange, as the policies of the Taleban do not real pose any threat to these illegal entities and tyrants. We should not forget that the ruler of Uzbekistan is the former top member of the Communist party Islam Karimov. His hatred to Islam is well known to many Muslims. Karimov closed thousands of houses of Allah - mosques and privately owned madrasas (Islamic universities) which taught the Qur'an and Arabic language, converting their buildings to museums, warehouses and military barracks. Not to mention his torture, killings of sincere Da’wah carriers from amongst the Muslims. Thousands of sincere Muslims rot in the prisons of this tyrant. However the Taleban regime wish good, peaceful relations with its neighbors.

    In another press release they state:

    "Afghanistan seeks friendly relations with all countries, particularly with neighboring states, and is ready to play an active and responsible role in the framework of the United Nations and on the basis of mutual respect to sovereignty."

    Another point that should be raised is that some Muslims hold that the regime in Afghanistan will bring Islam back to the world. The question raised is if that is true, how will this be achieved if Taleban believe in peaceful relations, and recognize borders? How will they carry Islam to the world if they will not enter into the affairs of other countries? What is the difference between Taleban in this specific issue and other regimes such as Iran or Saudi-Arabia?

    Also read the statement, "and is ready to play an active and responsible role in the framework of the United Nations and on the basis of mutual respect to sovereignty." This is not new as Taleban continues in its pursuit in gaining a seat in the so-called United Nations. Furthermore it is well known that the United Nations laws and regulations contradict Islam, and do not emanate from the Islamic Aqeedah. Its regulations recognize pirate states like Israel, and its ideals can not conform to the ideals of any true Islamic state. The Kufr of United Nations laws and covenant is beyond the scope of this article.

    Also read the statement of the Taleban leaders as they seek that ever elusive United Nations seat. In the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (I.E.A) Position Paper Regarding I.E.A's Recognition at the United Nations New York September 16, 1997:

    "The letters also contained a request for the transfer of the Afghanistan's seat at the United Nations to the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. The Head of the Islamic Emirate had further requested the Secretary General to forward the letters to the Credential Committee for its objective and impartial consideration. So far, the legitimate request of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has not been met and the personal representatives of Rabbani are still holding the Afghanistan's seat at the United Nations...."

    And read in another statement:

    "The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan makes its protest against the participation of the delegation of Rabbani's in-existed government in the 55th U.N General Assembly's Session. The people of Afghanistan have already rejected the Russian Agents in Afghanistan. They expect from the United Nations Organization to accept their representative government the I.E.A, to represent the country that has the authority to implement the decisions taken in the session."

    Furthermore in one of their statements they state they are willing to establish as their foreign policy:

    "B. Willingness to establish friendly relations with all countries based on mutual respect and non-interference.

    C. Following a policy of non-interference.

    D. Adherence to U.N Norms and Principles. "

    The most important statement that stands out, is their adherence to U.N. norms and principles. After all this we ask the respected Sheikh, can you truly hold the position that the foreign policy of Taleban is truly Islamic. How can these statements conform to the foreign policy of the Islamic state? Now we will pass on to some general evidence that show how there positions of the Taleban contradict Islam.

    The foreign policy of the Islamic state is to carry Da'wah to the world through Jihad:

    The Muslims know this position for centuries. It is known and was implemented, through it Islam came to lands as Spain, Egypt, Syria and so on. The foreign policy of the Islamic State is not to adhere to the United Nations. The adherence to such organization will mean, the Islamic state will not have the right to carry the Islamic call to the world. The Muslims will not have the right to be in one state, and remove the borders. As for the evidences that the Islamic State’s foreign policy is carry Islam to the world, then they are many, and clear. Jihad encompasses the offensive, defensive and pre-emptive war, providing that this war is for the sake of Allah since the evidences of jihad have come as general ('am) and unrestricted (mutlaq). He ta'ala said : ' Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth among the people of the Scripture, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued'. [9:29]

    And He ta'ala said : ' O Prophet ! Fight the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them'. [9:73 ] And He (saw) said : ' I have been ordered to fight the people until they bear witness that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. Until they establish the prayer and pay the zakat, and if they do so their lives and property will be safe with me, except as the Shari'a would dictate (if it was breached) and their reckoning will be with Allah'. (Bukhari and Muslim.)

    Thus Islam has come for the whole of mankind and Allah has obliged the Muslims to convey it in a manner which draws attention. So whoever embraces Islam or submits to the rules of Islam, that will be accepted from him, but whoever stands as an obstacle and prevents Islam from reaching the people, it is an obligation to fight him in order to remove this obstacle, and thus to open the way for the people to Islam: so either they embrace Islam or they submit to the laws of Islam.

    The evidences make it clear the obligation to fight to remove the obstacles that stand in the way of Islam reaching nations. The question is raised how will any state fulfill this task if they do not interfere into other nations affairs? Further more if a state wishes to adopt the U.N. as a framework, as well as not go against its principles, then this indicates that this state has no interest in making the Islamic rule applied in the world.

    Furthermore Imaam Mawardi (may Allah mercy be upon him) says in his Al-Ahkam As-Sultaniyyah that it is the duty of the Imaam of the Muslims to declare Jihad against those who reject Islam after having been called to it. And after having been requested to live under Islamic law, in order to make Allah's Deen dominant over the whole world. He says in that great book the 10 great obligations on the Imaam and from it :

    1. Protecting the Deen from its firmly rooted and settled foundations in order to preserve it from any defect and to prevent the Ummah from going astray.

    2. Executing the divine rules between disputing parties and settling the disputes between the people for justice to prevail. There will be no oppressors to transgress nor anyone weak who is oppressed.

    3. Protecting the realm, that is the territory of the Islamic state (effectively called: Baidhat ul-Islam the "mother's nest" or "The Egg of Islam") and the subjects so that the people may live together, have relations and journey safely, secure from any threat to their lives or wealth.

    4. To establish the Hudood (penal code) to ensure the prohibitions of Allah (SWT) are not violated and to secure the rights and property of the subjects from any threat or abuse.

    5. Protecting the frontiers (expandable borders) of the state with strong military weapons and undefeatable forces in order not to let the enemy attack unexpectedly and thereby preventing them from killing or violating the blood of any citizen/subject whether Muslim or non-Muslim i.e. Zimmi.

    6. Declaring Jihad against those who reject Islam after having been called to it and after having been requested to live under Islamic law and order in order to make Allah's Deen dominant over the whole world.

    7. Collecting booties and Zakat and whatever Allah obliges upon him without fear or injustice.

    8. Evaluating and distributing the wealth, grants and gifts to the subjects, including the money of Zakat to those eligible for it without extravagance or miserliness and making payments punctually neither before nor after their time.

    9. Appointing Omanaa trustees , Wulaat governors, Umaraa rulers, Al-A’mileem A’liyha collectors of Zakat, Al-Jubaat distributors, Al-Nuqabaa Wa Al-Mudaraa managers, Al-Qudhaat judges and others responsible for the different departments of the state to ensure all departments have suitable professional people and that their affairs will be settled and the wealth safeguarded.

    10. He must personally manage the affairs of the people and scrutinize the reports of his appointed rulers, governors and judges etc. in order to protect the Ummah and the Deen without complacency when dealing with his assistants and governors etc. and without being busy in pleasure-seeking or in ritual worship to ensure the trustees do not betray their trust and the trustworthy do not incline to dishonesty.

    In addition Imam Mawardi says: "If the Imam fulfils the rights of the Ummah, as we have described above he will have fulfilled the right of Allah regarding their rights and duties in which case they will be liable to obey and support him as long as his situation does not change" i.e. the conditions of ruling (i.e. the Imam is eligible for these rights in return for fulfilling his liabilities).

    Again if entering the United nations, excepting its principles, not interfering into countries affairs how will any state fulfill its duties? Rather it is not a temporal issue, were at the present time the regime in Afghanistan do not have the ability to fulfill this great duty. Rather they declared that they would not interfere into other countries affairs. Hence it is their foreign policy and an issue adopted.

    The obligation of supporting Muslims:

    Forming good relations with countries neighboring Afghanistan such as Uzbekistan, and not interfering into its affairs may lead to many consequences. We will give the example of Uzbekistan. In that country specifically the Muslims are under the oppression of a tyrant called Islam Karimov. In it many Muslims are being prosecuted. Young Muslims die in this tyrant prison. For what crime? None, only because they call to resume the Islamic way of life.

    However to hold the position of not interfering into these countries affairs, means that the obligation of supporting Muslims under oppression will not be fulfilled. Allah (swt) says:"but if they seek help from you in the matter of religion then it is your duty to help (them)"[TMQ Al-Anfal:72]

    While it is recognized that Taleban may not hold the opinion that they do not have the obligation to give victory to their Muslim brethren, however their policy of non-intervention will lead to this clearly. Also the messenger of Allah (saws) said "The Muslim Ummah is a unique Ummah among the whole of mankind: Their land is one, their War is one, their Peace is one, their Honor is one and their Trust is one" (Imam Ahmed). Here the messenger (saws) identifies the Muslims lands status as one land. Their war, peace, i.e. their affairs are one, the messenger (saws) is constantly using the word one. We ask recognizing borders rather then affirming the Muslim land as one identifies the Muslim lands to be disunited each independent of the other. Furthermore Imaam Ibn-Taymiyyah states in his fatawah that the lands of the Muslims are in the status of one land. (see Fatawa wa ikhtiyarat Ibn-Taimiyah vol.4 page 185 )

    The recognition of borders

    The Muslims are not allowed by the Shari’ah of Islam to be in many states. They must be gathered in one state under one Khalifah. The evidences for this are many and clear.

    The Prophet (saw) said

    "Whoever comes to you while your affairs have been united under one man, intending to break your strength or dissolve your unity, kill him". (Narrated in Sahih Muslim by 'Arfajah)

    Further to this Abu Bakr as sadiq said

    "It is forbidden for Muslims to have two Amirs for this would cause differences in their affairs and concepts, their unity would be divided and disputes would break out amongst them. The sunnah would then be abandoned, the bida'ah (innovations) would spread and fitnah would grow, and that is in no one's interests".

    Imam Jaziri says in his work, Al-fiqh Ala Madhabi Al-Arba'a

    "The Imams of the four schools of thought agree that the imama is an obligation...It is forbidden for Muslims to have two Imams in the world whether in agreement or discord"Al-Fiqh 'Alah-Madhabia Al-Arb'ia Vol 5 p416

    Imam Nawawi has also discussed this:

    "The scholars have agreed that it is not allowed to give the contract (of the pledge) in the same period of time even if Dar- Al -Islam spread (extensively) or not. Imam Haramain said in his book Al Irshaad "Our scholars have said that it is not allowed to have the contract (of Allegiance) with two people in one area and their is an Ijma on this."

    Also another evidence is The Ijmaa’ of the sahaba. It is narrated that Al-Habbab Ibnu Munthir said:

    "When the Sahabaa met in the wake of the death of the prophet at the saqifaa of Bani Sa'da, (they said) "One Amir from us and one Amir from you" (from the Muhajiroon and Ansaar) Upon this Abu Bakr replied "It is forbidden for the Muslims to have two Amirs for this would cause differences in their affairs and concepts, their unity would be divided and disputes would break out amongst them. The sunnah would then be abandoned , the bida'a would spread and the Fitna would grow , and that is in no one's interest"

    The Sahaaba heard this and consented. Hence it becomes a matter of Ijmaa’. See Al-Fasil-fil Milal by Ibn Hazm, Tarikh At-Tabari, Seerah of Ibn Ishaaq and others. As for the Ahadeeth of the prophet they are numerous. I will quote some: The prophet said (saws):

    "When the oath of allegiance has been taken for two Khalifs, kill the later of them" Narrated by Muslim

    The prophet (saws) said

    "Whosoever comes to you while your affairs are united under one man, intending to divide your staff or dissolve your unity kill him!!"Narrated by Muslim

    These evidences are clear, they forbid that the Ummah being disunited, with borders between them each entity independent to another, each ruler independent of the other.

    However the Taleban regime foreign policy recognizes these borders, accepts mutual existence with them, and furthermore adopts the policy of friendly relations with them. By this position they have consented and aided at the same time to this clear violation to the Shari’ah of Islam.

    These are some of the adoptions of the Taleban regime as foreign policy. After all this can we say that the foreign policy of Afghani regime is Islamic and that it is an Islamic state? In reality Taleban fails to implement parts of the Shari’ah and hence the claims that they implemented the Shari’ah in all spheres is not true. However unlike the rulers in the Muslim world the Taleban are sincere and their love for Islam is apparent. What they lack is general awareness in their implementation of Islam. At the end there is a great potential if the Taleban regime declared the Khilafah. It will mean that it would be binding for Muslims all around the world to give Bay'ah to the Khalifah. Furthermore the countries in central Asia were the Da'wah to the Khilafah is very strong will fall straight away. Forming a strong new state in the central Asia area. The potential is there, but unfortunately in its current form we cannot say Afghanistan is an Islamic state nor even implement the Shari’ah fully.
    7cgen

    #2
    Typical HT BS.

    Comment


      #3
      ya..total crap...as i was reading it..i was like what the hell..i dont know what will make these whiners happy...no matter who you are talking about..they hate them...buddy forget the khailfat stuff..when prophet SAW's companions could not keep them from in fighitng among them selves, how the hell can we, regular muslims keep order among us?? only hazrat ESSA AS will be able to unite the masses of the world in one total islamic empire, untill then it is pointless...yes, try to do jihad, but always attacking any one who even tries to implement islam is nothing but pure jealousy....and comon guys, give afghanistan a break, those ppl have been fighitng for 22 years..i think they deserve some peace, and secondly, there is no big obligation to spread islamic empire by jihad now days..earlier khalifas did this because the knowledge of islam could not reach the people and only through islamic empire, could the ppl of asia and europe see the beauty of islam..now days, almost every one knows about islam and even with out islamic conquests it is the fastest growing religion in the world, so jihad in my opinion is only obligatory to protect all the oprressed...be it in kashmir, palestine, chechyna, bosnia and other areas where muslims and non muslms are being opressed by their governments...cant talk more, have 2 tests tomorrow...i m outa here

      [This message has been edited by ThandyMazaq (edited November 08, 2001).]

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by ThandyMazaq:
        buddy forget the khailfat stuff..when prophet SAW's companions could not keep them from in fighitng among them selves, how the hell can we, regular muslims keep order among us?? only hazrat ESSA AS will be able to unite the masses of the world in one total islamic empire, untill then it is pointless...yes, try to do jihad, but always attacking any one who even tries to implement islam is nothing but pure jealousy....and comon guys, give afghanistan a break, those ppl have been fighitng for 22 years..i think they deserve some peace, and secondly, there is no big obligation to spread islamic empire by jihad now days..earlier khalifas did this because the knowledge of islam could not reach the people and only through islamic empire, could the ppl of asia and europe see the beauty of islam..now days, almost every one knows about islam and even with out islamic conquests it is the fastest growing religion in the world, so jihad in my opinion is only obligatory to protect all the oprressed...be it in kashmir, palestine, chechyna, bosnia and other areas where muslims and non muslms are being opressed by their governments...cant talk more, have 2 tests tomorrow...i m outa here

        [This message has been edited by ThandyMazaq (edited November 08, 2001).]
        Assalama alaikum. Sometimes it is sad to see our muslim brothers carry this individual mentality where they cannot picture a group of muslims achieving an aim set by Islam.They cannot see the reality change and so they remain defeated. Defeatism means where people feel they cannot do anything.It is not the case that there are only a few hundred people calling for the re-establishment of the Islamic state. In fact this call has echoed all over the muslim world and the muslim ummah would love to live under islam. As an example a recent survey was taken by the BBC in Pakistan and the majority of people said they wanted the shariah implemented, the same is the case in all other Islamic lands. so the ummah wants it and would even die for it. So the public opinion exists just like it existed in Madina after which the Islamic State was established.
        We as muslims are required to perform all of our obligations as muslims and it does not require the presence of a Prophet to be there. just like when muslims pray Salaah, pay the zakaat, perform hajj, work to Implement islam there is no need for a Prophet. Islam requires the muslims to change the reality and not be changed by the reality just like the iguana changes according to it's environment. So the current corruption that exists needs to be exposed and changed. If you read the post by Shokat he is highlighting the issues which disagree with Islam and it is his and your duty as a muslim to also work to change it.We must also understand that Islam is a complete and comprehensive ideology sent by Allah(swt) which does not contain any contradictions and does not need to be upgraded like my old pentium. Shokat provided many evidenses to back up the forign policy of an Islamic state. Just like alcohol is haraam (no matter how beneficial it became) it will remain haraam. The same applies to the method to expand the territories of the future islamic state insha Allah
        wa salaam.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Mr Xtreme:
          Typical HT BS.
          I second this

          ------------------
          • “na maiN momin vich masiitaaN, na maiN muusaa, na fir'aun!”
          Ain't new ta this....HOMEINVASION('93)

          Comment


            #6
            Why do u HT guys have to do such a long song and dance about everything? Haven't you heard of something called "to the point" and "precise". Darn! All that long cut-piece can be consolidated in one sentence:
            • "Hizb-e-Tehrir don't like the Talibaan, and we will continue to wait for a khalifah to come down from the heavens, because otherwise we will all go to hell"


            Kapeesh!

            [This message has been edited by MJ (edited November 14, 2001).]

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by MJ:
              Why do u HT guys have to do such a long song and dance about everything? Haven't you heard of something called "to the point" and "precise". Darn! All that long cut-piece can be consolidated in one sentence:
              • "Hizb-e-Tehrir don't like the Talibaan, and we will continue to wait for a khalifah to come down from the heavens, because otherwise we will all go to hell"


              Kapeesh!

              [This message has been edited by MJ (edited November 14, 2001).]
              MJ what is Khilafah?

              Comment

              Working...
              X