News:
The past few weeks have seen some issues concerning misuse of power and money by the government being raised in the Malaysian media. One of the issues concerned a ruckus in the Parliament last week about the wife of the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, who attended the Qatar International Business Women's conference at the St. Regis Hotel in Doha using an executive jet. The Parliament was told earlier this month that the use of executive jets by the government cost RM15 million for fuel and RM160 million for maintenance, with a single flight costing around RM 470,000. Answering the questions in the Parliament, the Minister in the Prime Minister's office, Datuk Shahidan Kassim explained that the departure of Rosmah to Qatar with an executive jet is with the approval of the cabinet and in the national interest. The MP of Pengerang, Azalina, on the other hand told the Parliament that Rosmah was invited to Doha on her personal capacity although she confirmed that the use of the jet was approved by Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin and members of the cabinet.
Comment:
The issue of the use of state property for personal gain by the leaders of a country is not a new issue and is not a strange thing in today's system of government. It happens everywhere and at all levels. It is rampant from the humblest of servants up to top officials and leaders.
In Islam, the statuses of those who work with the state are as ajir (employees). The state is the musta'jir (employer), represented by the head of state or other leaders (as trustee / governor) authorized by the state. The rights and obligations of both parties are arranged by the ijarah contract agreed. The salary to be paid by the employer is based on the job the employee has carried out in a certain period and with certain conditions that have been agreed in advance by both the employer and employee. On this basis, any income outside the salary or considerations obtained outside of what has been agreed upon by both parties is considered as unlawful earnings. Therefore, anyone who misappropriates the state's wealth for personal use is sinful and deserves to be punished in this world and in the Hereafter, more so if the misappropriation is perpetrated by the leaders of states.
Power to rule is a trust given by Allah (swt). If this trust, which is to rule by Allah's law is clearly ignored by the leaders of today's Muslim countries, what more issues concerning the misappropriation of wealth of the state! What transpires in this case where the wife of the Prime Minister was allowed to use the executive jet which is reserved for official governmental matters, when it was made distinct that the invitation to the conference is on a personal capacity, is a clear misappropriation of state wealth on the part of the leader. Misappropriation of wealth as a form of betrayal of trust under the current capitalist system will continue to haunt us as long as Islam is cast aside. Leaders who rule by Islam are leaders who are cognizant that power is a trust that Allah has put on them and they have to fulfil this trust with full devotion.
The Prophet said: «يا أبا ذر إنك ضعيف وإنها أمانة وإنها يوم القيامة خزي وندامة إلا من أخذها بحقها وأدى اليه فيها» "O Abu Dhar, you are weak and this (leadership and power) is a trust. On the day of Resurrection it will turn into shame and remorse, except for those who take the truth and fulfill that which is entrusted to them." [Muslim]
And said: «إذا وسد الأمر إلى غير أهله فانتظر الساعة» "If this matter (the trust of leadership and power) is given to one who is not capable of it, then wait for the moment's destruction." [Bukhari]
The Prophet (saw) reminds the Muslims in general and to the rulers specifically, that power is no more than a heavy burden that must be borne by them. If this burden is not fulfilled, then destruction is imminent. If we are indifferent towards our leaders who forsake the trust of authority that Allah has placed upon their shoulders, by not implementing Islam fully, then indeed, consciously or not, we are following their footsteps, walking into the fire of Hell! Nauzubillahi min dzalik!
Written for The Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir by
Dr. Muhammad / Malaysia
As reported by The Guardian and the Sydney Morning Herald (18/11) that the Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has become a target of surveillance carried out by the Australian Intelligence Agency - DSD. Not only President Yudhoyono was tapped but also his wife, Ani Yudhoyono,
Hizb ut Tahrir / Indonesia organized a series of actions to condemn acts of spying carried out by Australia in Indonesia, most notably the demonstration organized by the party in front of the Australian Embassy in Jakarta, where the Indonesian regime demanded the closing of the Australian embassy and the severance of diplomatic relations with it in response to the Australian regime's acts of spying in Indonesia.
Friday, 19 Muharram 1434 AH corresponding to November 22, 2013 CE
For Picture Slideshow: Click Here
.jpg)
Question
Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatahu
Yesterday as the people were dispersing after Friday prayer, and as you know how the people gather around the doors of the mosque, someone called out: "Send salutations upon the Prophet" to which another person responded: "Remain silent, this is an innovation (bid'ah)."
The question is: Is this an innovation or not? Wa Jazakum Allahu Khayran
Answer
Wa Alaikum Assalaam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatahu
They man's call upon the people to send salutations upon the Prophet (saw) at the door of the Masjid is not an innovation, because an innovation is a violation of a Shar'i matter, the means of which have been determined by the Shari'ah. The innovation, linguistically as noted in Lisaan al-Arab is "المبتدع الّذي يأتي أمراً على شبهٍ لم يكن...، وأبدعت الشّيء: اخترعته لا على مثالٍ", "The innovator comes with a matter in a form until then inexistent..., having ‘invented' a matter: Making it up with no example for it." Its conceptual meaning is the same. If for example the Prophet (saw) did something in a particular method and a Muslim deviates from this method, then this is an innovation. An innovation is thus a deviation from the method prescribed by the Shari'ah to carry out a Shar'i matter. And this is the deduced meaning of the Hadith:
«وَمَنْ عَمِلَ عَمَلًا لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ أَمْرُنَا فَهُوَ رَدٌّ» "Whosoever introduces into this affair of ours (i.e. into Islam) something that does not belong to it, it is to be rejected." [Bukhari and Muslim]
For example, if one were to perform three Sujuud in his prayers as opposed to two, since he has innovated a matter and deviated from the method of the Prophet (saw). If one were to throw eight stones instead of seven stones in Mina then he would have committed innovation because it has opposed what the action of the Prophet (saw). And if, for example, one were to add or remove words from the Adhan, then he or she would also have fallen into innovation as the Prophet (saw) approved of the specific wording of the Adhan.
However, the ruling on deviating from a matter of the Shari'ah in which a distinct method was not ordained falls into one of the legal ordinances, meaning: It is either Haram, Makruh, etc. if it is a matter of the regulatory ordinance (Hukm Wad'i) depending on the applicable indication to the matter, then it comes under the categories of Baatil, Fasiq, etc.
For example, it was reported by Muslim from Aisha (ra) in description of the Prophet's prayer (saw) that she said: ... وَكَانَ إِذَا رَفَعَ رَأْسَهُ مِنَ الرُّكُوعِ لَمْ يَسْجُدْ، حَتَّى يَسْتَوِيَ قَائِمًا، وَكَانَ إِذَا رَفَعَ رَأْسَهُ مِنَ السَّجْدَةِ، لَمْ يَسْجُدْ حَتَّى يَسْتَوِيَ جَالِسًا... "He (saw) upon raising is head from Ruku' would not make Sujud until he was standing upright and when he raised his head from Sujud he would not make Sujud until he was sitting upright."
Accordingly, in this narration the Prophet (saw) shows us that the Muslim should upon raising his head, not make Sujud until he is standing upright, and if he rose from his Sujud, he should not return to a state of Sujud until he is sitting upright. This is the method ordained by the Prophet (saw) and if anyone were to deviate from this prescribed method, then he or she has fallen into innovation. So, if a Muslim in prayer were to go immediately from Ruku' to Sujud without standing upright between the two, then he will have fallen into an innovation since it is opposition to the way the Prophet (saw) demonstrated to us. This is a wrongful innovation and the one committing it has fallen into grave sin.
However, it was reported by Muslim upon the narration of 'Ubaydah Bin Samit that:إِنِّي سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «يَنْهَى عَنْ بَيْعِ الذَّهَبِ بِالذَّهَبِ، وَالْفِضَّةِ بِالْفِضَّةِ، وَالْبُرِّ بِالْبُرِّ، وَالشَّعِيرِ بِالشَّعِيرِ، وَالتَّمْرِ بِالتَّمْرِ، وَالْمِلْحِ بِالْمِلْحِ، إِلَّا سَوَاءً بِسَوَاءٍ، عَيْنًا بِعَيْنٍ، فَمَنْ زَادَ، أَوِ ازْدَادَ، فَقَدْ أَرْبَى "I heard the Prophet (saw): He forbid the selling of gold for gold, silver for silver, wheat for wheat, barley for barley, dates for dates and salt for salt unless the same for the same, eye to eye, for whoever added or had something added, has indulged in Riba." If the Muslim violated this Hadeeth and sold gold with gold with increase (interest), and not the weight with weight, then it is not to be said that he has committed innovation, rather it is said that he has committed haram i.e. interest (riba).
In conclusion: The deviation from the method prescribed by the Prophet (saw) is an innovation. And the deviation from an absolute command of the Prophet (saw) without the prescription of a method falls into one of the following legal ordinances (Ahkaam Shar'iyah): Haram and Makruh, Fasiq and Baatil...This is determined according to the evidences.
In relation to your question, the Prophet (saw) did not prescribe a method for the speech of those leaving the mosque after Friday prayer. And thus the Muslim who sent salutations upon the Prophet upon leaving the Masjid has not fallen into innovation. Rather his action falls into the spectrum of legal ordinances (Halal, Haram, Makruh, etc) and accordingly, the act is permissible and there is nothing wrong with it. As a matter of fact, he is rewarded according to his intention, inshaAllah.
Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu al-Rashtah
Link to the question from the Ameer's Facebook page
Many newspapers; including Akhir Lahza Newspaper, addressed on Friday, 22/11/2013, the visit of an American team to Sudan, and its organization of the YES Academy Sudan program to teach dance in Khartoum, with the participation of more than 100 youth, evaluated by six American instructors for their dance talent. This program has taken place in cooperation with the Ministry of Culture and Information through the Support and Care for Innovators Fund.
As expected, the folly of the Second Economic Forum at the Friendship Hall in Khartoum, on the two days of 23-24/11/2013, convened by the Government of Sudan to resolve the severe economic crisis that hit the country and the people, was adjourned without a radical solution to the economic problem. The roots of the crisis were not even discussed. The emphasis of the dialogue focused on the results that emerged from reasons which they did not seek to understand, and therefore to be treated.
On November 23rd 2013, President Obama termed the nuclear deal with Iran as historic, and it was the first time since negotiations commenced in 2003 that brakes were put on Iran's so called nuclear weapons programme. He said, "Simply put, they cut off Iran's most likely paths to a bomb." The Jewish state does not share the same view and is opposed to the deal. The Jewish Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, called the agreement a "historic mistake".
Other states most notably the Gulf countries are disappointed with the agreement. S
ami al-Faraj, a security adviser to the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), told Reuters that Gulf Arab governments felt slighted by the deal. "Iran is sitting at the high table," he said. "We are left with the leftovers." He added, "We will acquire more weapons. We are going to check if our shopping list is adequate to respond to this. We are going to rally other nations that are hurt by this action into a unified diplomatic campaign."
Meanwhile, Iran struck a celebratory tone. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said, "God's grace and the support of the Iranian nation were the reasons behind this success," while Hassan Rouhani, the Iranian president, summed it up as an overwhelmingly positive deal. "This agreement benefits all regional countries and global peace," he said. So who are the real winners and losers here?
The answer lies in what has been agreed. The deal reached between Iran and the P5+1 (America, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany) is an interim deal and is the first step in a comprehensive agreement to be conclude in the future. The interim accord signed in Geneva sets out the following conditions:
It is evident from the agreement that a number of restrictions have been placed on Iran with the specific aim of disrupting Iran's ability to produce nuclear bombs. Furthermore, Iran has formally opened the door for further intrusive inspections that may lead to the dismantling of Iran's nuclear capacity, which Tehran has painstakingly put in place over the past decade and has spent billions of dollars. Additionally, West's success in dismantling Iraq's military capability and Syria's chemical weapons ability via UN inspections is an ominous sign of what may happen to Iran in the foreseeable future.
Yet despite this, Tehran continues to treat the Geneva agreement as a victory. For instance, Iran's Foreign Minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, has asserted that the agreement explicitly recognizes Iran's right to enrich uranium. He also said the agreement effectively removed the threat of an American military strike. US Secretary of State, John Kerry rejected both of those contentions. Regarding America threat of force against Tehran, Kerry was unequivocal, he said, "The fact is, the president maintains" the option to use force "as commander in chief, and he has said specifically, he has not taken that threat off the table".
So clearly, Iran is the real loser in this agreement, and the Jewish state and its patron America are true winners, as the Jewish state is not required to dismantle any of its 100 or so nuclear weapons, and America will use Iran to stabilise Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Islam forbids Muslim countries from surrendering their strategic assets to the colonialist powers. Allah says in the Quran:
((...وَلَنْ يَجْعَلَ اللَّهُ لِلْكَافِرِينَ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ سَبِيلًا))
"Allah will never allow the non-believers to have a way (sabil) over the believers." [An-Nisa: 141]
Rather than capitulating to Western powers and surrendering parts of the country's nuclear infrastructure, Tehran should be working towards creating a variety of nuclear weapons that can be used to not only to safeguard Iran but protect the whole Muslim Ummah. This is in compliance with the following verse of Allah:
وَأَعِدُّوا لَهُمْ مَا اسْتَطَعْتُمْ مِنْ قُوَّةٍ وَمِنْ رِبَاطِ الْخَيْلِ تُرْهِبُونَ بِهِ عَدُوَّ اللَّهِ وَعَدُوَّكُمْ وَآخَرِينَ مِنْ دُونِهِمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَهُمُ اللَّهُ يَعْلَمُهُمْ وَمَا تُنْفِقُوا مِنْ شَيْءٍ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ يُوَفَّ إِلَيْكُمْ وَأَنْتُمْ لَا تُظْلَمُونَ
"And prepare against them what force you can and horses tied at the frontier, to frighten thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them, whom you do not know (but) Allah knows them; and whatever thing you will spend in Allah's way, it will be paid back to you fully and you shall not be dealt with unjustly." [Anfal: 60]
But the truth of the matter is that the protection of the Muslim Ummah is far from the minds of Iranian leadership. Their strong support for the despotic Assad, cash payments to Karzai, assistance to Maliki's regime to spread terror in Iraq, and now the surrender of the nuclear programme to the West, clearly illustrates that their allegiance lies with the enemies of the Ummah and confirms the words of Allah:
أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ آمَنُوا بِمَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحَاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ وَيُرِيدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَنْ يُضِلَّهُمْ ضَلَالًا بَعِيدًا
"Have you seen those who claim to believe in the revelation revealed to you and the revelation revealed earlier? They seek the ruling of taghoot (non-Islam) although they have been ordered to disbelieve in it." [An-Nisa: 60]
Written for the Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir by
Abu Hashim
