The Campaign of Tabuk

The Tabuk Campaign contains many important lessons. It symbolises the Rasul’s courage, boldness & strategic nous in statecraft: in protecting the fledgling Islamic State from future threats despite being vastly inferior to the Romans in numbers & arms & resources. Against all odds, the Muslims were able to secure a remarkable victory without having to shed a drop of blood, strengthening the cause of Islam indefinitely. 


By Sayyid Abul ‘Ala Maududi, from his Tafsir of Surah At-Tauba

The Campaign to Tabuk was the result of conflict with the Roman Empire, that had started even before the conquest of Makkah. One of the missions sent after the Treaty of Hudaibiyah to different parts of Arabia visited the clans which lived in the northern areas adjacent to Syria. The majority of these people were Christians, who were under the influence of the Roman Empire. Contrary to all the principles of the commonly accepted international law, they killed fifteen members of the delegation near a place known as Zat-u-Talah (or Zat-i-Itlah). Only Ka’ab bin Umair Ghifari, the head of the delegation, succeeded in escaping and reporting the sad incident. Besides this, Shurahbll bin Amr, the Christian governor of Busra, who was directly under the Roman Caesar, had also put to death Haritli bin Umair, the ambassador of the Holy Prophet, who had been sent to him on a similar minion.

These events convinced the Holy Prophet that a strong action should be taken in order to make the territory adjacent to the Roman Empire safe and secure for the Muslims. Accordingly, in the month of Jamadi-ul-Ula A. H. 8, he sent an army of three thousand towards the Syrian border. When this army reached near Ma’an, the Muslims learned that Shurahbil was marching with an army of one hundred thousand to fight-with them and that the Caesar, who himself was at Hims, had sent another army consisting of one hundred thousand soldiers under his brother Theodore. But in spite of such fearful news, the brave small band of the Muslims marched on fearlessly and encountered the big army of Shurahbil at M’utah. And the result of the encounter in which the Muslims were fighting against fearful odds (the ratio of the two armies was 1:33), as very favorable, for the enemy utterly failed to defeat them. This proved very helpful for the propagation of Islam. As a result, those Arabs who were living in a state of semi independence in Syria and near Syria and the clans of Najd near Iraq, who were under the influence of the Iranian Empire, turned towards Islam and embraced it in thousands. For example, the people of Bani Sulaim (whose chief was Abbas bin Mirdas Sulaimi), Ashja’a, Ghatafan, Zubyan, Fazarah, etc., came into the fold of Islam at the same time. Above all, Farvah bin ‘Amral Juzami, who was the commander of the Arab armies of the Roman Empire, embraced Islam during that time, and underwent the trial of his Faith in a way that filled the whole territory with wonder. When the Caesar came to know that Farvah had embraced Islam, he ordered that he should be arrested and brought to his court. Then the Caesar said to him, “You will have to choose one of the two things. Either give up your Islam and win your liberty and your former rank, or remain a Muslim and face death.” He calmly chose Islam and sacrificed his life in the way of the Truth.

No wonder that such events as these made the Caesar realize the nature of the danger that was threatening his Empire from Arabia. Accordingly, in 9 A.H. he began to make military preparations to avenge the insult he had suffered at M’utah. The Ghassanid and other Arab chiefs also began to muster armies under him. When the Holy Prophet, who always kept himself well-informed even of the minutest things that could affect the Islamic Movement favorably or adversely, came to know of these preparations, he at once under- stood their meaning. Therefore, without the least hesitation he decided to fight against the great power of the Caesar. He knew that the show of the slightest weakness would result in the utter failure of the Movement which was facing three great dangers at that time. First the dying power of ‘ignorance’ that had almost been crushed in the battle-field of Hunain might revive again. Secondly, the Hypocrites of Al: Madinah, who were always on the look-out for such an opportunity, might make full use of this to do the greatest possible harm to it. For they had already made preparations for this and had, through a monk called Abu Amir, sent secret messages of their evil designs to the Christian king of Ghassan and the Caesar himself. Besides this, they had also built a mosque near Al-Madinah for holding secret meetings for this purpose. The third danger was of an attack by the Caesar himself, who had already defeated Iran, the other great power of that period, and filled with awe the adjacent territories.

It is obvious that if all these three elements had been given an opportunity of taking a concerted action against the Muslims, Islam would have lost the fight it had almost won. That is why in this case the Holy Prophet made an open declaration for making preparations for the Campaign against the Roman Empire, which was one of the two greatest empires of the world of that period. The declaration was made though all the apparent circumstances were against such a decision: for there was famine in the country and the long awaited crops were about to ripen: the burning heat of the scorching summer season of Arabia was at, its height and there was not enough money for preparations in general, and for equipment and conveyance in particular. But in spite of these handicaps, when the Messenger of Allah realized the urgency of the occasion, he took this step which was to decide whether the Mission of the Truth was going to survive or perish. The very fact that he made an open declaration for making preparations for such a campaign to Syria against the Roman Empire showed how important it was, for this was contrary to his previous practice. Usually he took every precaution not to reveal beforehand the direction to which he was going nor the name of the enemy whom he was going to attack; nay, he did not move out of Al-Madinah even in the direction of the campaign.

All the parties in Arabia fully realized the grave consequences of this critical decision. The remnants of the lovers of the old order of ‘ignorance’ were anxiously waiting for the result of the Campaign, for they had pinned all their hopes on the defeat of Islam by the Romans. The ‘hypocrites’ also considered it to be their last chance of crushing the power of Islam by internal rebellion, if the Muslims suffered a defeat in Syria. They had, therefore, made full use of the Mosque built by them for hatching plots and had employed all their devices to render the Campaign a failure. On the other side, the true Believers also realized fully that the fate of the Movement for which they had been exerting their utmost for the last 22 years was now hanging in the balance. If they showed courage on that critical occasion, the doors of the whole outer world would be thrown open for the Movement to spread. But if they showed weakness or cowardice, then all the work they had done in Arabia would -end in smoke.

That is why these lovers of Islam began to make enthusiastic preparations for the Campaign. Everyone of them tried to surpass the other in making contributions for the provision of equipment for it. Hadrat Uthman and Hadrat Abdur Rehman bin Auf presented large sums of money for this purpose. Hadrat Umar contributed half of the earnings of his life and Hadrat Abu Bakr the entire earnings of his life. The indigent Companions did not lag behind and presented whatever they could earn by the sweat of their labor and the women parted with their ornaments. Thousands of volunteers, who were filled with the desire of sacrificing their lives for Islam, came to the Holy Prophet and requested that arrangements for weapons and conveyance be made for them so that they should join the expedition. Those who could not be provided with these shed tears of sorrow; the scene was so pathetic that it made the Holy Prophet sad because of his inability to arm them. In short, the occasion became the touchstone for discriminating a true believer from a hypocrite. For, to lag behind in the Campaign meant that the very relationship of a person to Islam was doubtful. Accordingly, whenever a person lagged behind during the journey to Tabuk, the Prophet , on being informed, would spontaneously say, “Leave him alone. If there be any good in him, Allah will again join him with you, and if there be no good in him, then thank Allah that He relieved you of his evil company”.

In short, the Prophet ﷺ marched out towards Syria in Rajab A. H. 9, with thirty thousand fighters for the cause of Islam. The conditions in which the expedition was undertaken may be judged from the fact that the number of camels with them was so small that many of them were obliged to walk on foot and to wait for their turns for several had to ride at a time on each camel. To add to this, there was the burning heat of the desert and the acute shortage of water. But they were richly rewarded for their firm resolve and sincere adherence to the cause and for their perseverance in the face of those great difficulties and obstacles.

When they arrived at Tabuk, they learned that the Caesar and his allies had withdrawn their troops from the frontier and there was no enemy to fight with. Thus they won a moral victory that increased their prestige manifold and, that too, without shedding a drop of blood.

In this connection, it is pertinent to point out that the general impression given by the historians of the campaigns of the Prophet ﷺ about the Campaign of Tabuk is not correct. They relate the event in a way as if the news of the mustering of the Roman armies near the Arabian frontier was itself false. The fact is that the Caesar had begun to muster his armies, but the Holy Prophet forestalled him and arrived on the scene before he could make full preparations for the invasion. Therefore, believing that “discretion is the better part of valor,” he withdrew his armies from the frontier. For he had not forgotten that the three thousand fighters for the cause of Islam had rendered helpless his army one hundred thousand strong at M’utah. He could not, therefore, even with an army of two hundred thousand, dare to fight against an army of thirty thousand, and that, too, under the leadership of the Holy Prophet himself.

When the Prophet ﷺ found that the Caesar had withdrawn his forces from the frontier, he considered thee question whether it would be worthwhile to march into the Syrian territory or to halt at Tabuk and turn his moral victory to political and strategical advantage. He decided on the latter course and made a halt for twenty days at Tabuk. During this time, he brought pressure on the small states that lay between the Roman Empire and the Islamic State and were at that time under the influence of the Romans, and subdued and made them the tributaries of the Islamic State. For instance, some Christian chiefs Ukaidir bin Abdul Malik Kindi of Dumatul Jaiidal, Yuhanna bin D’obah of Allah, and the chiefs of Maqna, Jarba’ and Azruh also submitted and agreed to pay Jizyah to the Islamic State of Al- Madinah. As a result of this, the boundaries of the Islamic State were extended right up to the Roman Empire, and the majority of the Arab clans, who were being used by the Caesar against Arabia, became the allies of the Muslims against the Romans.

Above all, this moral victory of Tabuk afforded a golden opportunity to the Muslims to strengthen their hold on Arabia before entering into a long conflict with the Romans. For it broke the back of those who had still been expecting that the old order of ‘ignorance’ might revive in the near future, whether they were the open upholders of shirk or the hypocrites who were hiding their shirk under the garb of Islam. The majority of such people were compelled by the force of circumstances to enter into the fold of Islam and, at least, make it possible for their descendants to become true Muslims. After this a mere impotent minority of the upholders of the old order was left in the field, but it could not stand in the way of the Islamic Revolution for the perfection of which Allah had sent His Messenger.

Voting & Elections: Q&A

The question on whether Muslims can participate in elections and vote in elections has often been a contentious issue, with two opposing opinions often presented.

This piece, in a Q&A format seeks to encapsulates answers to the common questions one may have which addresses the root of the issue at hand.

As Muslims living in Australia, we must question our fundamental roles and responsibilities in this country. We must question the source of our identity in this country, and we must certainly question the extent to which Islam and the Muslims can help shape the future of this country. To ensure this discussion proceeds in an enlightened and productive manner, the following points regarding elections are presented to you for consideration.


Why are elections held in Australia every three years? (4 years for state elections)

Australia is a democratic country. In a democracy, the sovereignty ultimately rests with the people. Since it is impractical for the entire population to partake in government, the people select representatives to legislate on their behalf. Elections allow the people to elect representatives who are most closely aligned to their interests, whilst also accounting the existing government by way of the ballot box.

What is the Islamic position on the impending elections?

It is important for Muslims to realise that all their actions must emanate from Islam. As Muslims, we acknowledge by way of reason that Allah (swt) created life and all its elements. As a product of this belief, we appreciate the favour that Allah (swt) bestowed upon humanity by providing eternal guidance through the complete systems of Islam. So before any action is undertaken in life, the Muslim must be thoroughly acquainted with its Islamic ruling prior to its performance.

“Then shall anyone who has done an atom’s weight of good see it! And anyone who has done an atom’s weight of evil shall see it.” [TMQ 99:7-8]

In a democracy, it is the whims of humans that direct the lawful and unlawful. No credence is given to religion, tradition, custom or any other measurement. When elections are held in a democracy, its purpose is not only to elect representatives, but to elect representatives who will legislate on the peoples behalf.

Democracy in the West is underpinned by the secular basis of western civilisation. From the early 15th century CE, Western Europe underwent a revolutionary phase known as the period of enlightenment. In this period, a fierce struggle endured between the people and the clergy, the end result of which was the relegation of the church to the private sphere and the promotion of man’s whims to the public sphere. In this period, a clear line was drawn between religion and politics – a division that remains sacrosanct today.

Islam is a complete system of life. Its codes encompass everything from prayer and fasting to politics and economics. There is no distinction in Islam between the spiritual and the temporal. In Islam, Allah (swt) legislated for all aspects of life. As Muslims, we cannot claim to accept the guidance of Allah (swt) in our personal lives, but reject His (swt) guidance in the public life. Allah (swt) says,

“and We have sent down to you the Book explaining all things, a guide a Mercy and glad tidings to Muslims.”
[TMQ 16:89]

Moreover, sovereignty in Islam belongs to Allah (swt) alone. It is He (swt) that determines the halal and haram, not the whims and desires of man. We have in the Quran the complete orders of Allah (swt) and in the Messenger Muhammad (saw) the best example by which we implement these orders.

“But no by your Lord they can have no (real) Faith until they make you (O Mohamed) a judge in all disputes between them and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions but accept them with fullest conviction.”
[TMQ 4:65]

Through this understanding, we can appreciate the inherent contradiction between Islam, Democracy and Secularism. If we were to embrace the western secular creed, then we would be obliged to reject the guidance of Allah (swt) in the matters that encompass the public domain. Similarly, in a democracy, we would be obliged to place the whims of man above the guidance of Allah (swt). How can a Muslim accept any laws to be placed higher than the laws of Allah (swt)? Clearly, directly participating in the elections would be promoting a system that fundamentally contradicts Islam.

Isn’t Democracy like Shura in Islam?

Shura in Islam is the consultative mechanism by which Muslims decide through consensus (by majority or otherwise) upon a given matter. It is important to remember that Shura in Islam is limited to the area of Mubah (permissible matters). There is no Shura in Islam when it comes to the halal and haram, for it is Allah (swt) alone that determines the halal and haram.

It is true that elections are a part of Islam. The Khalifah of the Muslims is elected by the people and the members of Majlis Shura are also elected by the people. Of course, the Khalifah is elected to rule by the book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw), whilst the Majlis Shura is restricted to addressing matters of the Mubah (permissible).

A democracy is more than an election. Elections are merely one aspect of the democratic process. It is true that representatives in a democracy are chosen through elections, but unlike Islam, these representatives are elected to implement man made laws, not the laws of Allah (swt). We cannot separate the question of sovereignty with the question of representation. Moreover, just because two systems may be similar in one detail do not make both systems equal, especially when they both contradict each other in their fundamentals.

Isn’t there a benefit in participating in the elections?

Indeed there are perceived benefits! The Muslims in this country are strong and determined. Whenever we are confronted with pressing priorities, time and time again we will plan, coordinate and execute any endeavour that ensures the betterment of our communities and wider society.

The elections are no exception. The Muslims have the ability to group for this purpose. We can work with a strong voice and an even stronger agenda. We can influence governments of all persuasion. We can effect legislation to a degree, and we can secure better funding and better resources. There are some benefits to be accrued through the election process.

However, benefit is not the criterion for action in Islam. It is the halal and haram stipulated by the Shariah. When we undertake actions as Muslims, we don’t ask whether there is a benefit or harm, we ask if it is halal or haram. When Allah (swt) asks the Muslims to pray, do we seek a benefit such as improved fitness to justify performing the prayer? If we could not see a benefit, or if we could see a harm, would we then abandon the prayer? Furthermore, are we not convinced that it is Allah (swt) that is in the best position to determine the harm and benefit?

Although there are various gains to be acquired by participating in the elections, the question we must first ask is whether it is permitted by Allah (swt)? We cannot allow our whims to override the decision of Allah (swt). Since the elections are an inherent part of the democratic and secular process, then how can we justify participating in a system that contradicts the very basis of Islam?

What about voting for Muslim candidates?

The reality of Capitalist politics is that every action is driven by benefit. This benefit can either agree with Islam or disagree with Islam. As every candidate in a democratic election is obliged to abide by the secular framework, then a Muslim candidate must be willing to place the rule of man above the rule of Allah (swt). It is one thing for a non-Muslim to implement kufr, but what can be said of a Muslim that does the same? Here, the emphasis in on participating in the legislative process and not whom you elect to do it.

It is argued of course that voting for a Muslim candidate will assist them in their cause. Notwithstanding the arguments surrounding benefit in Islam, we only have to consider the pitiful ineptitude of Muslim parliamentarians in the Islamic world to see the glaring fallacies of this logic. If a majority Muslim presence in the parliaments of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Turkey, Pakistan, and Indonesia failed to prevent the massacre of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan, then how much influence will one or two candidates in Australia wield?

The reality is that even the non-Muslims have awoken to the fallacies of democracy. Whilst the overwhelming majority of Australians were opposed to the war on Iraq, the government rejected their calls and joined hands with the invaders of Iraq. If the very proponents of democracy have shunned their own system, then why do some Muslims continue to naively prescribe to this utopian view?

But does not Islam advocate the lesser of two evils?

It is rightly stated that there does exist a principle in Islam known as the lesser of two evils. But in order to use this argument, we must first accept that participating in a democratic and secular process is inherently haram, which of course, it is!

But we must also ask two questions: Firstly, what are the options open to the Muslims and are there only two? And secondly who defines the greater or lesser evil?

Is it correct to say that the only two options open to the Muslims are either to vote or not to vote? It could be argued that there are other options such as conveying the message of Islam or even emigrating from Australia.

Conveying the message of Islam when done in an organised manner can, due to the strength of the Deen, create a public opinion in Australia that is more conducive to Islam rather than antagonistic towards it. There is no reason why this work must be performed only within the mainstream political process. We all have the ability to access the influential people as well as the wider society through talks, meetings, publications, conferences, protests and more. The Muslims have established countless mosques, schools and community organisations without compromising their Deen. The end result of all this work would be the alleviation of some of the problems confronting the Muslims as well as the spreading of the noble values of Islam in a Capitalistic-benefit driven society.

Emigrating from Australia is another option available to the Muslims. Australia is certainly in the minority when it made voting compulsory. If the Muslim is sincere in avoiding a haram, and is convinced that the only manner in which to avoid sin of voting is to emigrate, then what is to prevent that Muslim from emigrating to the countless other countries where voting is not compulsory?

So not voting means that the Muslim is in fact preventing himself from committing a clear violation of Islam. Conveying the message of Islam in Australia and speaking out against corruption is something that is clearly recommended in Islam. And to emigrate is permissible and can even be an obligation when a person is forced in a particular land to commit a forbidden act or to be prevented from performing an obligation.

In this respect, participating in the elections is the only action that is evil in origin! Where is the justification then in resorting to the principle of the lesser of the two evils?

As for the question of who has right to decide which of the evils is greater or lesser, is it Allah (swt) that determines the evil or is it the human mind?

Further to this, it cannot be said that by doing evil we are able to bring about a greater good and thus prevent harm. From this point, one could then argue that the Madrid bombings was an evil that brought about the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq, and occupation and killing of Muslims is a greater evil hence this was a justifiable action!

“Say: Shall we tell you of those who lose most in respect of their deeds? Those whose efforts have been wasted in this life while they thought that they were acquiring good by their works” [TMQ 18:103-104]

What about the Shariah of the previous Prophets?

We should be aware of the apparent contradiction in this argument. In the previous point the use of the justification of the lesser of the two evils implicitly accepts that participating in elections is Haram. However, using the story of previous Prophets, such as Yusuf (as), as a justification implies that it is not haram. So either it is permitted by Islam or it is haram? It has to be one or the other!

The proponents who use this argument state that Prophet Yusuf (as) was allowed to enter a non-Islamic government and hence we can also enter such a government. They also state that Prophet Yusuf (as) ruled by non-Islamic laws in a non-Islamic government.

A detailed refutation of this argument is beyond the scope of this piece. However, one must question how can Prophet Yusuf (as) on the one hand call to the straight path away from shirk and yet be of those that implements Kufr? This can never be!

In fact the Prophet Muhammad (saw) and his Sahaba faced countless similar situations as a Muslim minority living amongst the majority Kuffar who ruled by Kufr. Yet when the Prophet (saw) was asked to compromise and work within the system of the Quraysh by offering kingship, women, money and a share in their rule, his response was clear “…By Allah if they were to put the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left, on condition that I relinquish this matter, I would not relinquish it until Allah made it dominant or I perish therein”

Similarly Allah (swt) warned the Prophet (saw) by saying,

“So obey not to those who deny (the Truth). They wish that you should compromise with them, so they too would compromise with you” [TMQ 68:8-9]

But isn’t living in the country already participating in the system?

No! This would be analogous to the Prophet (saw) living in Mecca and trading with the Quraysh. We would never say that the Prophet (saw) was implicitly supporting the rule of Kufr by virtue of living and trading there, nor could it be said that he (saw) was implicitly supporting the policy of torture and killing of the Sahabah.

But some parties are traditionally more friendly to Islam and the Muslims

This is a serious point.

We must first understand that Islam is a complete way of life. It is ideological. Islam cannot coexist with Capitalism or Socialism, just as Capitalism cannot coexist with Socialism and vice versa (importantly noting we refer to ideologies, not people). As such, there will always be a struggle between competing ideologies. It is natural and it is to be expected.

Australia is a Capitalist nation. It embraces the Capitalist doctrine that has its roots in the secular creed. Every political party in this country – of every persuasion – adopts and works for the Capitalist ethos. It is the collective role of these parties to ensure the politics of this country function within the Capitalist framework. So every lobby group and every constituency that wishes to be heard by these parties must do so within this framework.

The Muslims in this country are of no exception. If we wish to form a valid constituency by which we exert our pressure on these political parties, then we must do so within the Capitalist framework. For a Muslim this means accepting the imposition of Capitalism, Secularism and Democracy over Islam. At the same time, it means that we must relegate Islam to our personal affairs and not the public domain. In this way, we must accept an authority higher than the authority of Allah (swt) and we must accept a set of laws other than the laws of Allah (swt). Those Muslims who argue for participation in elections should ask themselves the following question: at what cost is the perceived benefit gained?

So the argument over which political party is better for the Muslims is redundant considering all political parties are working to ensure Capitalism prevails over Islam. In any case, it would be naive to think that Islam could be derived through kufr, or that halal could be derived through haram.

But if I don’t vote, how can I counter the threat of voices hostile to Islam?

Firstly, which voice is not hostile to Islam!
It is true that the climate of Islamophobia may intensify in the short term but by no means could this be a justification for committing an act that violates the sanctities that Allah (swt) has laid down.

Secondly, on which basis is it claimed that voting in the elections is the only way to project the Muslim voice?

The only way to remove the anti-Islamic propaganda is to engage with the non-Muslims in the wider society to show and explain the sublime values of Islam thereby removing ignorance and fear of Islam. Unfortunately, we see this as a difficult task to undertake yet our faith is strengthened through struggle and sacrifice.

Thirdly, who said the only two options are to vote or not to vote?

Just because you refuse to engage in the secular and democratic political process does not mean you choose to disengage from the political process altogether. On the contrary, Islam commands the Muslim to carry Islam and enjoin all the good and forbid all the evil. A Muslim could never isolate himself/herself from the wider society. It is that Islam is carried within the bounds of Islam, not kufr.

What is the objective of a Muslim in this country?

In answering this question, it is important that our reality be the subject of thinking rather than its source.

Allah has placed the Muslims as witnesses over mankind. It is then incumbent upon us that we spread the Deen of Allah wherever we may live, ensuring that our Islamic identity is preserved and our conduct be an example for the wider society. The example of our beloved Prophet (saw) should be our only consideration when delivering the call, challenging all that contradicts Islam and presenting the Islamic alternative. In a time when the enemies of Islam are working relentlessly against the Deen of Allah (swt), the Muslims wherever they may be must respond in a way that accords with the Shariah, never deviating from the path of haqq and justice.

A brief look at the reality around us reveals a society whose basis has resulted in epidemic crime levels and a wider social discontent. The Muslim community should aim at becoming the glitter amongst the worn particles, a ray of light that attracts those whom long for tranquillity, contentment and solutions. The Muslims have at their disposal a comprehensive system revealed by the Almighty Creator of the universe. Muslims must generate sincere debate, and present this system using different styles to various aspects of society, individual thinkers, and communities alike.

Most importantly, Muslims must realise that they are not a minority, rather part of a global Ummah whose strength is derived from the Islamic Creed (Aqeedah), and whose destiny is one that The Creator has so willed. A destiny that places His (swt) Deen beyond and above all other ways of life, and a destiny that never allows the rule of man (or any other) to be placed over His (swt) rule.

The advocacy to vote in non-Islamic systems where the justification is benefit for Muslims, is at best indicative of a defeated, secular mentality, and at worst a desire to cooperate in the plan to distance Muslims from the pure and unadulterated Islam. It is thus obliged that the Muslims in this country continue to avoid swimming in a sea of kufr and dive into the cool sparkling purifying waters of Islam, and it is only with this dive that we refuse the crumbs that are offered and we opt for the whole solution.

The Muslims are one global Ummah. The objective of the Muslims living in Australia is the same as every Muslim around the world. We must unite intellectually and work towards uniting politically under Islam. The fate of the Muslim community in this country is inextricably linked with the fate of the Muslims globally. The successes, pains, and tribulations of the Ummah will reach all its members in all corners of the world.

Our problem is none other than the absence of the application of Islam as a complete and comprehensive system. We all have a duty to support and actively work towards the re-establishment of the Islamic state in the Islamic lands, which will implement Allah’s (swt) Deen in totality, unite the Muslims, carry Islam to the world, and defend the lives and honour of every man, women, and child under the protection of the state.

Dear brothers and sisters in Islam, you are invited to raise your vision, break away from the shackles of the status quo, and realise the Ummah is indeed a giant awakening from slumber.

“O you who believe! Respond to Allah and His apostle when He calls you to that which will give you life” [TMQ 8:24]

Brief History of the Development of the Arabic Language


Arabs have always prided themselves on their language and, in particular, their poetry.
Poetry was the primary medium of ancient times through which tribes were praised, enemies were lampooned, messages were sent, and much more. At the fairs of cUkāz, poets would read and listen to poetry as well as critique it as an inter-tribal custom.


But with the arrival of God’s Messenger (peace be upon him), the language took on a whole new importance.
It was a prerequisite to scholarship and knowledge of it became a matter of the utmost seriousness:

“Learn Arabic as you learn the [Islamic] obligations and practices.” [Ali b. Abi Tālib]

And erring in it was a matter of shame and even misguidance; the Prophet (PBUH) is reported to have said the following after hearing a man make a grammatical mistake:

“Guide your brother, for surely he has erred” [Prophet PBUH]

To illustrate the nature of grammatical mistakes: A man once said “O ye who is seen but cannot see” referring to God and trying to say “O ye who sees but cannot be seen.” So a blind man answered him, “Here you go; that’s me.”

As Islam unified the Hejaz – and later the known world – it became the dominant ideology and scholarship in it was the highest honour. Therefore, scholarship of the language flourished and proficiency in it was vital in order to avoid misquoting the Qur’an, the sayings of the Prophet (PBUH), and secondary books of scholarship.
Many authorities went as far as to say that even something as simple as responding to God’s query (ألست بربكم) “Am I not your lord?” with (نعم) “Yes” as opposed to (بلى) “Indeed!” was an act of apostasy!

The Early Development of the Language

However systematic codification of Arabic didn’t begin for quite some time. The Caliph Ali (r.a., d. 661) is popularly cited as the common ancestor to the study. It was then his student Abu Aswad Ad-Duwali who began to delve into grammar and Mucāz b. Musallam Al-Harrā, a student of Abu Aswad, who began to delve into morphology. Mucāz then trained the caliph Abdul Malik b. Marwān (d. 705). And Abu Aswad also had many disciples to his name.

A few decades down the road, these disciples yielded Khalīl b. Ahmad (d. ca. 776) whose works in prosody and grammar are famous. He is a huge figure in the study of the language. One of his students was the father of classical Arabic, the Persian, Sibawayh (d. ca. 796) whose book, know only as Al-Kitāb, is the most well-known of them all. A four volume treatment of the language, it is the primary basis for all future works on the language and is a framework for the methodology in the study. Sibawayh’s book constitutes the Big Bang of scholarship on the Arabic language.

Following Sibawayh were other important figures such as Al-Kasā’i. It is after this initial codification that grammarians slowly began to divide into the two camps of Basra and Kufa. By the end of the Arab golden age at around the 10th century, these groups became well established and were actually rivals. There was so much animosity between them, in fact, that one would give a ruling only to oppose the other. But despite these fierce conflicts, the Basran camp came out dominant by the 10th century. By this time, most of the language had been systematically codified and methodologies were now in place thanks to seeds sewn by Sibawayh and the dint of pious men and women who followed him. Further medieval work on grammar was expansion on these Basran frameworks.
Further Medieval Development and Important Figures

One of the students of Sibawayh was the famous Al-Akhfash Al-Awsat (d. ca. 830), a grammarian of Basran inclination like Sibawayh himself. Among the students of Al-Kasā’i was the famous Al-Farrā (d. 822) who was of Kufan inclination.

Following these were many grammarians, including Mubarrad (d. 898). He authored the famous Al-Muqtadab. Al-Zajjāj, roughly contemporary to Mubarrad, was followed by Abu Ali Al-Fārsi (d. 987), As-Sarrāj (d. 929), Al-Zajjāzi (d. 950), and Abdul Qāhir Al-Jurjāni.

Further down the chain – after the the Basran frameworks had been set – is Zamakhshari (12th century) who authored the profusely cited Al-Mufassal, Ibn Al-Hājib (13th century) who authored the much commented on Al-Kāfiya, and Ibn Mālik (13th century) who authored the infamous Al-Khulāsa, more popularly known as Alfiyya. And contemporary to these figures was Ibn Hishām who authored many famous books including the often cited Qatr An-Nada and Mughni Al-Labīb. By the 13th century great scholars had come and gone, leaving masterpieces of grammatical theory in their wake.
It is an unfortunate reality and indication of the stupor of the Muslim world, that a large portion cannot comprehend the Qur’an & classical works of the great Scholars of the past.
By learning this chosen language of Allah (swt), once again can the Ummah rise to its heights and delve into the beauty of the religion and vast volumes of knowledge.

أبو المعالي عبد القاهر القصاب الريرعطاني. “رسالة في مدح النحو.” سبيل الهدى على شرح قطر الندى وبل الصدى (الطبعة الأولى). جمال الدين أبو محمد عبد الله بن يوسف الأنصاري المعروف بابن هشام. دمشق: مكتبة دار الفجر، ٢٠٠١. ١٠-٢٣.

Sellheim, R. “al- Khalīl b. Ahmad b. camr b. tamīm al-farāhīdī al-azdī al-yahmadī al-basrī abū cabd al-rahmān”. Encyclopaedia of Islam. Second Edition. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill.

Carter, M.G. “Sībwayhi”. Encyclopaedia of Islam. Second Edition. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill.

Brockelmann, C. “Al-Akhfash”. Encyclopaedia of Islam. Second Edition. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill.

Sellheim, R. “al-Mubarrad , Abu ‘l-cAbbās Muhammad b. Yazīd b. cAbd al-Akbar al-Thumālī al-Azdī.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. Second Edition. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill.

Pellat, Ch.; Longrigg, S.H. “al-Basra.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. Second Edition. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill.

Djaït, Hichem. “al-Kūfa.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. Second Edition. Edited by: P. Bearman , Th. Bianquis , C.E. Bosworth , E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill.

Causes for the Sudden Decrease in Oil Prices by Sheikh ‘Ata Bin Khalil Abu Rashta

Q&A answered by Sheikh ‘Ata Bin Khalil Abu Rashta



Media outlets have published this Wednesday, 07/01/2015 CE that Brent Crude Oil prices hit $49.66 per barrel, as too did the American crude oil, falling to around $47 per barrel, given that oil prices in 2014 have reached $115 a barrel at the beginning of summer in June in 2014. Then returned to gradually decrease until it reached at the beginning of winter, (at the end of December 2014) to $60 a barrel, and even lower than that, when the prices of West Texas crude oil reached $58.53, and here in the first week of January 2015, it reached to about $50, i.e. more than 50% decrease within five months! What are the causes for this sudden fall in oil prices? And what is expected for oil prices in the future?

The drop in oil prices encompasses different causes, most notably is the economic factor isolated from the political objectives … including the political factor that triggers the economic factor towards the advantage of the political factor beneficiary.

The economic factor isolated from the political objectives: (increasing the supply of oil, or lack of demand …), (Tensions, especially military escalations in the oil producing areas and around …), (speculation in the oil market and tampering with the data of weakness of the economies of the influential countries in exporting or importing of oil.)

The political factor to trigger the economic factor towards the interests of the state carrying out the political action, such as (increasing the production, or supplying large amounts of oil reserves, but not for an economic need), but it is (to reduce the price in order to influence the policy of the competing states, especially those who depend in the budget on oil prices), or (to limit the production of oil shale to reduce natural oil price to the level that will bring down the cost of oil shale so that its extraction becomes irrelevant).

We will outline these issues and summarize the possible causes for the notable drop in oil prices:

First: the isolated economic factor from the political objectives

1. Supply and demand:

Oil, like any other commodity, its price is determined through supply and demand, when the oil market witnesses a surplus in supply, its price will be reduced. This is found in the economic crises of the importing countries which decreases the demand because the country in crises’ ability to import oil in high price is less, this is why the demand decreases which leads to the drop… Similarly when there is a great oil demand and it exceeds the supply, the price rises.

2. Tensions and Military Escalation:

There is also another factor that affects the price of oil, that is “suspense”, i.e., the oil market expectation, like the occurrence of a problem that disrupts the supply as a result of wars or tensions in the oil producing areas … Therefore, the geopolitical tensions in the Middle East where oil areas could be the cause of the rise in oil price. Although there is no change in the amount of oil supply or demand, the oil market can push towards a rise in oil prices if there are fears of a possible supply disruption.
When tensions calm, there is a reduction in the price of oil back to the previous value or the real price. For example, the war-speech between the Jewish state, the United States and Iran in February 2012 CE, led to the rise in oil prices, and Forbes Magazine reported, “With the rise in oil prices reaching the highest reported levels for several years, much of it is caused by geopolitical concerns, by putting Iran on the military conflict table. Attacking Iran will push the United States into a recession,” [Forbes, February 2012].

3. Speculation and Exploitation of Economic Data:

The poor economic data of some countries that influence the oil, exporting or importing, such as the United States and China can lead to a fall in oil prices, regardless of the change in supply or demand for it. And in this case, the market fears a slowdown in economic output, and interpret it as an inevitable decline in oil consumption, and therefore the price will drop. Speculators prey on the market expectations to raise oil prices or reduce it to earn profits, and as a result, the price of oil is affected by supply and demand.

Economic data and speculation depend on a number of key players, from oil-producing countries (such as Russia, Canada, and Saudi Arabia … and others), and oil-importing countries (such as China, Japan … and others), and multi-national oil companies (such as Exxon Mobil, BP and others), and the oil cartel (such as OPEC, and oil traders known as speculators). Each group of them have the ability to influence oil prices, either through influence on the supply or demand, or by anticipating variation in oil prices through speculation. Economic Data and speculation as a result of economic crises in relevant countries strongly affect the prices.

Second: The political factor to trigger the economic factor for the interest of political factor beneficiary:

1. The issue of oil shale:

America surpassed both Saudi Arabia and Russia as the largest oil exporter in the world, because of extracting oil through jackhammers underground. The Bank of America stated in the summer of 2014:
“The United States will remain the largest oil producer in the world this year, having surpassed Saudi Arabia and Russia in the extraction of energy from oil shale, which would revive the economy in the country. The US production of crude oil, along with the liquid, separated from the natural gas, has surpassed other countries this year, with a daily production of more than 11 million barrels in the first quarter of this year …” “The United States is perceived as the largest oil producer, after it bypassed Saudi Arabia.” [Bloomberg, July 4, 2014]

The oil and gas shale revolution in the United States has resulted in an increase in oil production of 5.5 million barrels per day in 2011 to what is now more than 10 million barrels per day, making it meet most of its needs, dropping its imported oil from Saudi Arabia to less than half, to about 878 thousand barrels a day after it was 1.32 million barrels per day.

However the problem with oil shale is that it has a high cost of up to $75 a barrel while the cost of natural oil does not exceed $7 a barrel; hence signifying that the oil-producing countries of rock – headed by the United States – will be harshly hit if the price of oil dropped from the cost.

2. The subject of the reduction in price not for an economic need, but as part of the penalty for the competing states:

There are two international issues of influence and interest in the world:

The subject of Iran’s nuclear negotiations and the issue of the occupation of Russia to the Crimea, and these two countries depend in a large part of their budgets on oil exports; hence the sudden drop in the oil price to half will undoubtedly affect their policies towards the two issues cited. The Russian budget contributes to the oil and gas, i.e. energy, within the limits 50%, but that is raised in some estimates, Russia needs oil prices at $105 a barrel to reach parity in the economy.

Oil contributes more than that in Iran’s budget. It reaches more than 80% of the budget, and believes that the price of oil should go up more than $130 a barrel to cover the internal projects and its assistance to its followers in the region. Therefore, the drop in the price of oil to this level strongly affects its budget.

Third: By reviewing of the above-mentioned reasons, it shows the following:

1. The isolated economic factor from the political objectives:

a. Supply and demand has virtually remained unchanged in recent years, and when it does, it only changes slightly and does not lead to this sudden drop. Even last summer, the global price of oil remained relatively stable at around $ 106 per barrel of WTI, for nearly four years, but a significant drop in the prices of oil cannot be explained entirely economically. Oil production has been above 80 million barrels per day over the past decade since 2004.
At the end of 2013 the global oil market produced 86.6 million barrels a day, then production increased thereafter and increased demand at the end of 2013 through the third quarter of 2014, bringing the supply and demand closer together.
According to the figures provided by the International Energy Agency in the third quarter of 2014, the average supply reached 93.74 million barrels, and the average demand was 93.08 million barrels [Source: International Energy Agency site].
The slight increase over four years may have been affected by the gradual drop of a few dollars a barrel, but it cannot fall in five months to half, unless the economic factor is not the main reason.

b. Tensions and military escalation, is not new but are almost constant over the last four years … the crises in the region did not intensify sharply to cause a sudden drop in oil prices, escalation and tensions in the region since 2011 until now continue in a pace hardly surprising and unexpected.

This is with the knowledge that in origin during political crises in a region and in the world there would be a rise in oil prices as what took place in several incidents since 1973. And now that the crisis in Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, and Libya, has intensified, the price per barrel is expected to increase to $120, and even to $150, according to some speculation. The drop in prices in this manner is unusual if the factors are purely economic because crises and wars affect the supply routes, and there will be a shortage in the supply resulting in an increase in the oil price and not a drop, therefore there are reasons other than the sole economic factor.

c. Speculation and Exploitation of economic data: since 2008 at the height of the economic crisis things are at a standstill, they didn’t deteriorate but there was some improvement. Therefore it can be said that the sole isolated economic factor is not the main reason for the drop in oil prices to this low rate, which exceeded the 50% decline than it was five months ago.

2. Second: the political factor to trigger the economic factor for the interest of political factor beneficiary:

a. The issue of oil shale:

The cost of oil shale extraction is between $70 to $80 per barrel, and the use of advanced modern technologies in the extraction can lower this cost to reach $50-60 a barrel, the IHS company (a research company) believes that the cost of producing an oil barrel from shale oil has fallen from $70 a barrel to $57 in the last year, due to the oil men learning to dig wells faster and extract more oil,
[“The Senate versus shale oil,” The Economist 6/12/2014].
Therefore, the reduction of the oil price to about $50 or $40 a barrel makes oil shale extraction futile, even if it was cut to $60-70 a barrel it would be not viable, because to be economically viable it requires an appropriate difference between the cost and the selling price.

Hence OPEC’s lack of reduction in oil production or rather the lack of reduction in the oil production of Saudi Arabia could be one of the reasons … It is well known that America exploited oil shale production due to the increase in oil prices of natural oil to above $100 per barrel, therefore reducing the natural oil prices makes the production of oil shale futile.

The natural oil prices can withstand reduction and remain viable because the cost does not exceed $7 per barrel while the shale oil costs up to ten times that as we mentioned earlier.
Accordingly, whatever the reduction of price in the natural oil, it will remain viable, and as Saudi Oil Minister, Ali al-Nu’aimi, said, “OPEC will not reduce its production even if the price of crude oil fell in international markets to $20 a barrel” (Al Jazeera, 24/12/2014) and he explained that “the OPEC quota, as well as that of Saudi Arabia has not changed for several years, it is in the limit of thirty million barrels per day, of which about 6.9 million barrels is of Saudi production, while the production of other non-OPEC countries is increasing constantly.”

As it is well known, the Saudi monarchy currently under King Abdullah has strong ties with the British, and therefore we can say that the interest of Saudi Arabia not to reduce production and pressurize OPEC for this is within the British policy agreed with Saudi Arabia to influence America’s production of shale oil.

b. When America learned this is OPEC’s direction which is influenced by Saudi Arabia, who has the greatest share in OPEC, and especially after the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) had met at its headquarters in Vienna, on 27/11/2014, and the members of the organization did not agree to cut production to support prices.
This is because Saudi Arabia has refused to reduce production, and they stated that they can live with lower prices in the short term: when America learned that, Kerry, the US Secretary of State, visited Saudi Arabia on 09/11/2014. He met King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia at his summer residence in an unplanned visit. Although the media reported reasons other than oil for the visit, the evidence indicates that the purpose of the visit was the oil prices … After this particular visit, Saudi Arabia begun to increase oil production by more than 100,000 barrels per day during the remainder of September and in the first week of November. Saudi Arabia has reduced the price of oil (Arab Light) by 45 cents a barrel, pushing oil prices to the rapid drop from $80 a barrel. A senior official in the U.S. Department of State that global oil supplies were discussed during the meeting.

When Kerry could not persuade Saudi Arabia to reduce production, he discussed the topic from another angle; he expressed approval of the reduction because it will affect Russia which occupied the Crimea as well as it will impact Iran in terms of nuclear talks, and that he sees that these reasons will find the approval from Saudi Arabia; but he wanted the reduction in the range of (80). It seems that Saudi Arabia had agreed to it or showed approval. The British newspaper, The Times, on 16/10/2014 stated that “Saudi Arabia has taken a carefully calculated position to support lower oil prices around $80 to make oil shale extraction economically non-viable, which pushes America back to import oil from Saudi Arabia and to take shale gas out of the market.” This is as a result of Britain standing behind Saudi Arabia in the face of America in its support, which is working to revitalize its economy to get rid of the repercussions of the financial crisis, even at the expense of others and striking them. It is well known that the current regime of Abdullah Al-Saud is loyal to Britain.

America showed that it has satisfied Saudi Arabia, in terms of the approval of the reduction, as well as showing Europe that its accusation of America that it is not placing pressure on Russia for the occupation of the Crimea, and its lack of pressure on Iran in the nuclear energy file, is not true and the evidence is its agreement to reduce the price of oil which impacts the budgets of the two states … Then it also pleased some Russian opposition; in early March, the billionaire, George Soros, suggested to the US administration a means to punish Russia for the annexation of the Crimea by slashing off the oil prices … So Kerry tried to show his approval of the reduction but to a certain extent and then deceived Europe and the Russian opposition that he is serious in supporting Ukraine against the Russians, which is contrary to the reality.

But for the first time America finds itself unsuccessful, the wind came with what the ships detest, oil prices continued to fall to around $60 a barrel in few months, and Saudi Arabia insisted not to cut but increased production; all of that resulted in a backlash in the oil market as it is known that the morale factor can influence market prices.

Fourth: Current Expectations:

1. It is difficult to reinstate the original prices.

2. However, the continued reduction affects both parties:

a. In Saudi Arabia, backed by Europe, particularly Britain, because this year’s budget is hit by a deficit of 145 billion Saudi riyals out of 860 billion riyals, reserved for the expenses i.e. a deficit of about $ 40 billion, due to the drop in the oil price.
And this affects its interior projects, more importantly, what occurs to Britain’s exports to Saudi Arabia, and in particular the arms due to Saudi Arabia’s budget deficit, which hit …
Where Britain’s exports to Saudi Arabia amounted in 2012 to 7.5 billion sterling pounds in addition to the investments of the British companies that amount to 200 companies with investments of about $11.5 billion sterling pounds per year, all of which will be affected by Saudi Arabia’s lower financial ability due to low oil prices, and particularly that the Saudi government’s budget receives 89% of its revenue from oil exports. Therefore the continuation in the reduction will affect it in this regard.

b. On the other hand, the continued reduction affects America’s production of oil shale, because it is due to rising prices of oil in recent years it decided to invest billions of dollars in oil shale extraction in America, and it seemed so profitable, so it added over 4 million barrels of oil per day since 2008 and this proportion was effective in world oil production.

Although the drop in the price of oil stimulates the economy in America, the loss of its oil shale trade is much higher, and it is not easy for it to let Europe, Saudi Arabia, and OPEC destroy its investments.

3. Accordingly either America works on modern technology methods to reduce the cost of shale oil production so that it becomes viable with the current low oil prices – but this is not easy, especially if the price of oil continues to drop, and it seems that this drop has not yet stopped.
On 7/1/2015 it was published that it dropped below $50 a barrel … and either America heads directly to Saudi Arabia and creates some crisis to Saudi Arabia and make its budget deficit grows and force it to reduce production and thus increase the price of oil … or either to alleviate its crisis with Britain in Yemen and Libya in return for Britain putting pressure on Saudi Arabia to reduce production followed by OPEC reducing its production pushing the oil price to rise … Since these three need scheming and extended plotting, in the meantime, the low oil price crisis will remain and its drop or rise will be according to the result of the power struggle or according to compromising transactions; i.e. the capitalist way.

Fifth: the international politics is turbulent and is stumbling, as soon as a crisis ends another one starts, all of this is due to the corruption of the capitalist system that is dominating the world, which carries within it the international crisis, and then leaves people suffering in a miserable existence, and the international system in general … All this corruption, manipulation, misery, and suffering will continue as long as the capitalist system is in control. These crisis will not end until the return of the Divine System that Allah سبحانه وتعالى has obliged on His slaves, which is the guided Khilafah system carries justice and reassurance for all.

وَيَقُولُونَ مَتَى هُوَ قُلْ عَسَى أَنْ يَكُونَ قَرِيبًا

“”When is that?” Say, “Perhaps it will be soon”
(Al-Isra: 51)

16 Rabi’ I 1436 AH

7/1/2015 CE

Sheikh ‘Ata Bin Khalil Abu Rashta is an Islamic jurist, Scholar and writer. He is the current Amir (global leader) of the Islamic political party Hizb ut-Tahrir.
His official facebook page can be found at

Commentary on Charlie Hebdo and the Physical Law of Compression

By Ismail Alwahwah

Scientists and specialists in all fields cry with joy when they reach a scientific finding or a natural law, given the great benefit that humankind will accrue from its applications, and due to the amount of effort, energy, money and time exhausted by the researchers.

There is a widely recognized natural law which states that compression on any material (inducing change in the positions of its atoms and molecules) leads to deformation and in extreme cases explosion. Scientists and specialists found that this natural law can also be applied to humans and societal conditions.


Sociologists and psychologists studied this law deeply and took advantage of it in in treatment, addressing those individuals who, due to the pressure to which they are subjected, commit suicide, face depression, hopelessness or harm others. Likewise it was beneficial in the treatment of the deformities that families suffer from, which result in family breakdown and many domestic issues, or for the treatment of deformation in the communities as a whole and what results from it such as chaos and bloodshed.

Because the specialists in the West acknowledge this natural law of pressure generating an explosion, and that it – the pressure – is responsible for triggering the explosion, the cure has always focused on eliminating pressure or reducing it. As a result, it is assumed necessary in all cases to ensure that the pressure does not exceed the red lines, which will then ultimately lead to irreversible problems.

What baffles the mind is that when it comes to Muslims, be they individuals, groups or communities, we find that most of the specialists (in particular the politicians) in the West believe that practically this law concerning compression and explosiveness, never applies. This, as if to suggest that another law has been discovered in its place, namely that any deformation that affects Muslims is due to a defect in their understanding, mindset and religion. When it comes to Muslims, one is not allowed, under any circumstances, to point the finger at the compression and the application of pressure irrespective of its magnitude. Accordingly, seeking to alleviate the pressure or stopping it would not be part of the solution.

Rather, the focus is on treating the nature of the Muslims and how to ensure they remain immune to the compression even if put under pressure by all the demons of mankind and the jinn!
For Muslims, the pressure to force them to submit to the laws of anyone but Allah should not lead to any explosion!

For Muslims, the pressure exerted by the dictatorial corrupt regimes should not lead to any explosion!

For the Muslims, the occupation of their countries and the killing of their sons and daughters should not lead to any explosion.

For the Muslims, the occupation of Al-Aqsa and Palestine, and the forced expelling of its people should not lead to any explosion!

For the Muslims, the exploitation of their resources and the pressure this leaves with them dying out of hunger and poverty should not lead to any explosion!

For the Muslims, the daily humiliation they are subjected to, and the insults to their book and prophet, irrespective of magnitude, should not lead to any explosion!

Woe, time and again, to all those who point the finger at any pressure when it gets a blast from the Muslims, regardless of size…… For the accusation is ready; You justify the explosion, you justify terrorism !!!

The sad reality is that the ordinary Muslims are paying the price of both the compression and the explosion that follows it, but lightening blasts neither listen to, nor consult anyone.

This is how our situation will remain as long we remain orphans at the tables of villains.

[Indeed, Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves] Quran 13:11

Written for the Central Media Office of Hizb ut-Tahrir
By Ismail Alwahwah
Arabic Media Representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia

Four Points That Put ISIS in Perspective

By Abdul-Latif Halimi

ISIS aren’t as impressive as its fanboys would have you believe.
Four points.

1. Its territorial scope is vast, but relatively useless, particularly on the Syrian side. Ar-Raqqah to Mosul — the traditional region of al-Jazirah — is impressive on a map, but a region of little economic, historical or geopolitical weight. In fact, it’s the desert heartland of the Khawarij historically and what agricultural potential was there has been decimated by drought and what large population communities were there have withered out to a large degree (eg. at least half a million people left Mosul).
Deir ez-Zor and Ar-Raqqah (despite being Harun ar-Rashid’s capital for a few years), even before they were depopulated, are minor and insignificant cities that had the country’s 7th and 8th largest populations respectively. Bilaad ash-Shaam’s prestige, as relevant to Syria, is in the country’s west; Syria’s historical and economic centres are in the cities of Damascus, Aleppo, Homs, Hamah and region of Hawran.
Simple experiment: If you had a week in Syria, either as tourist or businessperson, what would your itinerary look like? Areas now held by ISIS would not come up because they don’t register as significant. They are peripheral.
That tells you something about the lack of ‘weight’ of what they’ve taken as opposed to the other rebels (who have taken half of Aleppo city, Deraa up to rural Damascus, the Eastern Ghouta and some eastern suburbs of Damascus city, Quneitra on the Golan Heights, etc).
ISIS, not that impressive.

2. Mosul and Sunni Iraq, the undoubtedly impressive gain, was a low-hanging fruit. The Iraqi military’s personnel packing up and running away in their underwear isn’t a sign of exceptional military prowess on the part of ISIS — it’s a sign of a corroding, corrupt and fundamentally inept Iraqi military that dissipates at first challenge, led by a corrupt political class that had completely disillusioned Sunnis. The region was ripe for the taking and taking it isn’t as epically impressive as it first appears.
Is that relevant? Of course it is, because it says more about the exceptionally dire condition of the Iraqi military than it says about ISIS capability — you’re not as impressive as you think you are. You can force the rubbish Iraqi military to flee through your sheer presence, but how do you fare if Turkey takes a decision to invade your territory and take you out like it seemed poised to two months ago? How do you fare in the face of a professional, disciplined and emotionally-invested force? Kobane is giving the world a strong idea of ISIS’ true capabilities, and they’re simply not as good as the reputation many would try to sell to you.
So if a few thousand Kurds with US air support (it’s urban area, so air power is significant but not overwhelming factor) can stop ISIS in their tracks and swamp them in a bloody war of attrition, what about those states that stand in the way of ISIS and its fantasies? Turkey, Jordan, Saudi and Iran would each, if directly confronted, skin ISIS alive.

3. ISIS leaders and members are absolutely uncompetitive globally. I don’t mean that as an insult, I mean that as a descriptor. Its principal constituent base is a loose coalition of angry 20 year olds [who need to be reached out to], pseudo-clerics with little credibility and deranged idiots. You’ll get an exception here and there, but nothing to make a substantial difference to the quality and production capability of a ‘state’.
They might have good multimedia people and acoustics engineers, but where are those who can help develop the hard-power capability to match those around them in a region armed to the teeth? There’s only so much one can loot from Assad and the Iraqi military before they realise that while shooting down one jet is easy, bringing down an entire squadron or permanently neutralising an air threat that toys with you from the sky is impossible.

Bottom-line: How do you defend the ‘sovereignty’, dignity and airspace of your state? What, ISIS are going to take over the Middle East with their leaders and fighters holed up in urban areas every-time an American jet flies by? And there’s no way that will change; these folks are incapable of producing anything sophisticated to seriously counter what they face, nor are they a magnet for the people that can.

4. ISIS economics doesn’t work. It’s impossible to survive, let alone flourish, as a state (i.e. Mosul and some minor cities) isolated from the world, unless North Korea is your model. If economic autarky is possible, ISIS are definitely not the ones to achieve it. They don’t have the natural or human resources to sustain a quality of life over the long-term consistency with what the people expect or demand based on their past experience.
Modern trade requires mutual recognition between ‘states’ or some kind of international credibility. So, if ISIS need an MRI machine for a Mosul hospital or chemicals to treat the water, where does it get them from? Where do you get cancer drugs or the infrastructure for air transport in your ‘state’? Those who produce these products cannot and will not sell them to you. Period — you’re North Korea and a huge blow to the ‘Islamic project’ and its credibility.

Conclusion: ISIS, its prospects, its socio-economic architecture are not as impressive as presented by its supporters or propaganda machine. If anything, it is a fleeting, unsustainable and volatile reality.
Conclusion II: Iran, Assad and Maliki are savage enemies, but ISIS is not the answer.

The Greatest Blessing & Reclaiming Our Honour

This was a talk delivered by Sheikh Mohammed Junaid Thorne in an Islamic centre in his early 2014 tour of Brisbane.
The video is below, followed by a summary of the talk.

• Allah created all creation, mankind, believers and disbelievers, and out of his Mercy Allah has given people different blessings and bounties: money, position, reputation, eyesight, hearing…all these are the different bounties of Allah. If one has more than others, it’s a source of pride: if you have a good body, money car etc. you are inclined to boast about it: these are sources of a superiority complex

• Allah has given all these bounties to everyone, both Muslim and kafir

• The most important bounty that can be bestowed upon a person however, is the blessing of Imaan: hence on the Day of Judgement, when those are sent to Jannah and Jahannam, it is THEN when people will realise the blessing of Imaan, they will say “Praise be to Allah who guided us to this Path…”

• So shouldn’t Imaan be the main thing we boast about, and be proud about it?

• The Sahabah were aware of the significance of this blessing, and took it upon themselves to spread it far and wide

• A lot of our brothers and sisters, despite being given the bounty of Islam, are ashamed of this tremendous Ni’mah… how many brothers change the name of Muhammad! Sisters instead of wearing Hijaab, we see all these types of fashions, tight clothes with Hijaab, which totally defeat the purpose of Hijaab, our brothers wearing the clothes of the disbelievers, wearing their slogans

• Most of us don’t recognise the bounty of being Muslim being born Muslim…look at reverts, and their energy and vigour, because they appreciate the Ni’mah, they knew the darkness they were in

• Let’s look at the Sahabah: Abdullah bin Maktum (RA), an old blind man, whom the Rasul (saw) was rebuked due to him in Surah ‘Abasa…after he accepted Islam, he put himself as a tool to spread Islam, he was one of the Muadhins during that time (second after Bilal (RA)). In one of the battles he was the flag bearer of Islam: in those times the fall of the flag was a symbol of defeat and therefore very crucial. So when this battle started, he asked to hold the banner. He was asked “Are you sure you are up for it?” He said, “I don’t deserve to be a holder of the Qur’an if Islam is to be defeated because of me.” This was a man who sought to implement the Qur’an in its fullest most holistic sense. How many of us today, people get the worst image of Islam because of their character? What’s worse, some of these people have Islamic knowledge, memorized Quran, but are full of arrogance

• Julaybib (RA) has a very unique story: he was an outcast, no one knew where he came from: he had no family or wealth…it was like he fell off a tree. One day he entered the Masjid & Rasulullah (saw) asked him “Do you want to get married?” He said “Yes, but who will marry me, I have no money, reputation, property or anything”. Rasulullah (saw) said, “Don’t worry, go to the house of such and such from the Ansaar & tell them Muhammad commands you to marry your daughter to me.” It was a very very noble house of the Ansar, not any house. He said, “O Rasulullah, how will they accept when they are such a high status, and I am no one?” Rasulullah (saw) said, “Don’t worry, just go.”
He knocked the door of the house and said, “I’m Julaybib, a messenger of the Rasul, who said…” The Ansaari asked him to give him a few days to think about it. So Julaybib came after a few days, and this time he could hear the man consult with his wife, who said “Only if it was someone else besides Julaybib; someone that we know, and has some something to vouch for him…” So they were about to turn him down, then the daughter came out “how can you turn down the messenger of the Messenger (saw)? Marry me to him.” And they were married. Someone from a high noble status, to someone that was nothing. This shows the criterion for the world is not the same for the Hereafter

• After one of the battes, I think Uhud, after the Quraysh had departed & the Muslims were in the battlefield looking for the missing and burying the dead, Nabi (saw) asked “do you miss anyone? Is anyone unaccounted for” Everyone mentioned a name, of a friend and loved one… but no one mentioned the name of Julaybib (RA). Because no one knows him. So Nabi (saw) tells them, “But I miss julaybib, go and search for him”. He was found amongst 7 mushrikin. So they brought him to Muhammad (saw), and he started to weep and mentioned “As for him, he is from me and I am from him.”
How did someone with nothing in this dunya reach such a high status with the heart of Rasulullah (saw)?

The criteria of this world is nothing for the success of the Akhira. You may be someone with the best position in this world, biggest bank account house, property, reputation… But does that guarantee you success after death, on the DOJ? No, it is ‘Amal that does. What you contribute to this Deen, guarantees you success in the Hereafter, and hence Nabi (saw) cried due to him, due to his sincerity

• ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab (RA) when he sent his armies to conquer Rome, he sent Abu ‘Ubaidah (RA) to al-Quds, and they managed to conquer it from the Christians alhamdulillah – and we ask Allah to conquer it again today from the Jews – they said we will only give it to you and sign the treaty if your Amir comes. So ‘Umar (RA) rode all the way, offered two Rak’ah in Masjid Al-Aqsa and met Abu ‘Ubaydah, and the army was set up in front of him, it was a huge army. It was a place very difficult to conquer as everyone coveted Al Quds. After this monumental victory, what did Umar say looking at the army? He didn’t get arrogant saying this is the unconquerable/invincible army. He gave gratitude to Allah (swt). He said, “We are a nation that Allah has granted Izzah through Islam.” The number of swords, horses, nuclear bombs was never the criteria… “So whenever we seek this glory through something else other than Islam, Allah (swt) will humiliate us.” If we seek victory through our military & logistical power, brains, technology, Allah will humiliate us… And this is what we see today, every country is boasting about its achievements: the result is the Muslims are being butchered, killed by their hundreds daily…why? Because the main factor is missing, being proud of Islam, practicing Islam properly… then he turned to Abu ‘Ubaydah (RA) – and this was after such an amazing achievement for Islam – and said, “What have we gave to Islam? What have we contributed?”
Abu ‘Ubaydah (RA) said, “Let’s go, and cry”. So they went and hid behind a tree to start crying. Nowadays we give some charity and then sit comfortably in our blankets thinking we’ve done enough.
Shouldn’t we be the ones crying ya Ikhwaan because we haven’t done anything?

• We all know what’s happening…you brothers are from Somalia, you know the situation, the crusaders coming and destroying the nation… yet we watch the TV, then change the channel and watch a movie, having shisha with friends

• We will be accountable… every one of us will be asked alone on the Day of Judgement, and will be asked, “What have you contributed to this Deen? Didn’t I give you wealth, physical power, the ability, the understanding of what was going on. You were aware of the situation… and yet you chose to sit at home doing nothing, or you to slander & backbite those who are putting their lives on the line for the sake of Allah ‘Azza-wajjal, protecting our honour and dignity.” Everyone of us will be asked.

• I ask Allah (AWJ) to make us of those who contribute to this Religion, and contribute to its ‘Izzah, with our lives, wealth and children and I ask Allah to grant us back Bayt al Maqdis and grant us a prayer there before we die, Ameen.


Q: How do we memorize Qur’an?
A: It all starts from a small age: they say memorizing at a small age is like writing on stone…whilst memorising during old age is like writing on the sea.

Q: Who was supporting you in your journey of learning Islam?
A: I moved with my family there, my step-father got a job, my family was religious and took me to the Masjid. The Mashaykh sponsored me after staying with them for around 7 years, they saw I had the passion…it’s all tawfique from Allah (AWJ)