Translation by Umm Jaabir (weproofread4u.blogspot.com)

I would like to suggest hereby few issues that should be looked into carefully regarding the usage of the word “Allah” by the non-Muslims.

As mentioned in my previous article (2007) entitled “The Difference between Saying ‘Allah’ and Protecting Our `Aqeedah”, this issue is more of a local issue involving public harmony, while it does not involve any specific prohibition from the authoritative evidences of Islam i.e. the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Therefore I hope that this statement will be read along with the aforementioned article.

The Arab Christians and non-believers of Makkah used the term “Allah” to refer to God. Evidences from the Qur’an and the Sunnah support this. However, in the Malaysian context, this issue is rather new and unique. Therefore, it incites reservations and uncertainties, especially in various issues and questions that arise due to this incident, one of which is what is the genuine intent behind such demand?

For the Muslims, the education [and understanding] of `Aqeedah has never been adequately emphasized. Too much emphasis is placed on Fiqh that we forgot about the fundamentals of our belief, which is `Aqeedah. Consequently, though many Muslims perform their obligatory prayers, many also easily believe in khurafat, bomoh, tahyul (superstition, black magic, witch-craft, etc) and others.

If our `Aqeedah is clear and firm, without doubt issues such as this one, Christianization effort, and influences from other religions would not be able to interfere with [or threaten] our `Aqeedah and mind. On the contrary, this issue should make us realize the importance of emphasizing and purifying our `Aqeedah and knowing the boundaries of iman (belief) and kufr (disbelief).

In order to avoid confusion and unhealthy conflicts within our country and the multi-racial and religion society, I would like to put forth few suggestions as guidelines for the government to look into:

1. The name “Allah” should not be used, except to refer to the true Almighty God. Therefore, no group is allowed to call any other gods that people claim to be god or a third/middle person/intermediary to God by the name “Allah”. Examples include calling an idol, a stone, an object or other human as “Allah”. If this happen, it is rightful for the Muslims to denounce it. The disbelievers of Makkah who called the true God as Allah and committed shirk (associate others with Allah) against Him, never once called their idols “Allah”. On the other hand, these idols were called by al-Latta, al-`Uzza, Manaat, and others.

2. For people to call the true God as Allah is indeed appropriate as this also proves that Islam is correct when it teaches us to call God as “Allah”. Therefore, it is acceptable; moreover it should be encouraged for everyone to say “Allah is the Creator of this universe”, “Allah sends down rain”, “Allah instructs us to do good” and others regardless of their religion. These are truly words of truth. It is incorrect for the Muslims to deny these facts when mentioned by non-Muslims. In fact, the Qur’an says:
“And if you asked them, “Who sends down rain from the sky and gives life thereby to the earth after its lifelessness?” they would surely say “Allah.” Say, “Praise to Allah”; but most of them do not reason.” [Al-Ankaboot, 29:63]

3. If they [the non-Muslims] admit that Allah is the true God, and consequently they call Him as such in their rituals, then a Muslim shall not interfere with the rituals of other religions. While Islam vehemently opposes their acts of Shirk (associating Allah with others), the freedom of performing rituals is the right of every religion.

4. The non-Muslims shall not use the name “Allah” to spread words that vilify Islam, such as making fun of Allah in their media to the Muslims, or making fun of the name “Allah” in writing, drawing, making films or anything of that nature, as often happens in the West.

5. The non-Muslims shall not introduce confusion or obscurity in the teachings of Islam by abusing or misusing the name “Allah”. Such provocative action shall be dealt with sternly. Islam holds onto a general principle of humanity that no party shall exploit or introduce confusion to the teachings of others. As such, the Muslims shall not do so to the teachings of other religion.

6. To say the name “Allah” in communications between Muslims and non-Muslims in a respectful manner and to honor Allah like when a non-Muslim say to a Muslim, “may Allah bless you” or “may Allah grant you rizq” are allowed. Rather, it should be practiced as such. In one occasion when the Prophet sallAllahu `alayhi wasallam and the Quraysh of Makkah entered into a treaty, both used the name “Allah” as mentioned in a hadith in Sahih Muslim:

It has been narrated on the authority of Anas that the Quraysh made peace with the Prophet (may peace be upon him). Among them was Suhail bin `Amr. The Prophet (may peace be upon him) said to ‘Ali: Write “In the name of Allah, most Gracious and most Merciful.” Suhail said: As for “Bismillah,” we do not know what is meant by “Bismillah-ir-Rahman-ir-Rahim” (In the name of Allah the Most Gracious and Most Merciful). But write what we understand, i.e. Bi ismika Allahumma (In thy name, O Allah).

These are few of my suggestions that can be used as guidelines with regard to this very issue, so that the Malaysians will stay calm and not get involved with protest demonstrations due to it. On the contrary, every party should respect the sensitivity of others.

Translation by R. Abdul-Hamid

I don’t like to be too philosophical in what I say. The purpose of speech and the written word is for the message to be understood by those on the receiving end, not for it to be so convoluted so as to confuse them. Having said that, there are certain terms that need further clarification, not for the sake of mere philosophizing, but because elaboration is necessary to avoid conflict between Muslims.

Among the most important distinction to be made is one between ‘permission’ (izin) and ‘approval’ (redha). Approval does not always accompany permission. Similarly, permission does not always follow approval. At times we permit and approve of an act, and at other times, we do not permit and do not approve of an act both at the same time. To permit an act means to allow it to take place (cf al-Kafawi, al-Kulliyyat, 72, Beirut: Muassasah al-Risalah), while to approve often involves a degree of fondness for the act, called ‘Al-Mahabbah wa al-Ridha’ (ibid 76).

We, in the exercise of our jurisdiction, may either allow an act accompanied by our approval or without it. Our permission does not always translate into our approval. For example, when a Muslim political ruler gives his permission for other religions’ places of worship to be erected, it does not necessarily reflect on his approval of idolatry or the worship of that other than Allah.
Similarly, when a Muslim ruler gives his permission to the non-Muslims to do something that run contrary to the teaching of Islam, such as the consumption of alcohol and gambling within their own premise, it does not mean that the said ruler is making those acts ‘halal’. That permission is given in accordance with the rights that they, as non-Muslim citizens, possess, in terms of freedom to practise religion and a particular lifestyle.

Rulers are meant to manage the affairs of their subjects in a manner that is fair and just. Permission that is granted by rulers in their political capacity does not show a crooked creed (aqidah) or that they have made ‘halal’ what is forbidden (haram). Unless, of course, those rulers personally feel fond of those acts for whose practise they have given permission, or they themselves join in committing those acts. If that is the case, then a valuation of their aqidah is most certainly called for.

What is being argued is that not everything that happens with permission comes with approval. I give the example of a son who seeks his father’s permission to take the family car so that he can drive it around with friends. The father is reluctant for fear of the son’s inability to control himself in his friends’ presence.

But the son persists in wanting to drive the car and keeps at his demand until the father finally relents and in turn, hands the car key to the son. The son later brags to his friends, “My father allowed me to drive his car” while the father, upon being asked, will say, “It’s true I allowed him to drive the car but I did not approve of it. He kept asking and I didn’t have the willingness to continue the fight.”

The aforementioned situation illustrates how permission is given without approval. How many young women are afflicted with the same implication when they allow themselves to be married off by their fathers to men not of their own choosing.

There are also occasions where we cannot permit something that we approve of for several valid reasons. That is why in the Quran, the word ‘masyiah’ or ‘wishes’ is used at the same time the word ‘redha’ (approval) is mentioned. Man acquires faith (iman) when Allah permits it and wishes for it. Without Allah’s permission and wishes for something to happen, they will never happen.

Nevertheless, not everything permissible in the sight of Allah, is also approved by Him. Allah says in the Quran,

“Is he, then, to whom the evil of his conduct is made alluring, so that he looks upon it as good, (equal to one who is rightly guided)? For Allah leaves to stray whom He wills, and guides whom He wills. So let not thy soul go out in (vainly) sighing after them: for Allah knows well all that they do!” (Surah Fatir:8)

Allah leaves to stray whoever He wishes because they choose misguidance over guidance. Likewise, He guides those who choose guidance over misguidance. Such is the law of nature as ordained by the Creator, the ever Just. He does not wrong His servants.
When an act of disobedience is committed by the servants, that does not mean Allah approves of it even though it happens within His permission. Allah says,

“And remember! your Lord caused to be declared (publicly): “If ye are grateful, I will add more (favours) unto you; But if ye show ingratitude, truly My punishment is terrible indeed.” (Surah Ibrahim:7)

Glorified be Allah, pure and clean from any comparison with His own creations. However, in light of practicality in life, we need to draw the distinction between ‘permission’ and ‘approval’. In the covenant of Hudaibiyah, the Prophet (pbuh) agreed with the terms of the negotiation even when he did not approve of them. A hadith related the event as follows,

“Indeed, the people of Quraisy sought to seal a peace treaty with the Prophet (pbuh). Among their representatives was Suhail ibn Amr. The Prophet asked to open the negation with ‘BismiLlahirrahmanirrahim’ (which means ‘in the name of Allah, the most benevolent and most merciful). Suhail objected on the grounds of them not recognising such a phrase, asking instead for ‘Bismikallahumma’ (which means ‘in your name, O Allah)”

In the riwayat of Bukhari, the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have concurred.

I explain this distinction (between ‘permission’ and ‘approval’) to avoid an environment of mutual accusation between different groups of Muslims, with regards to many current issues, the use of the name Allah being one of them. This issue has created a lot of tension within the Muslim community, such that it leads to the labelling of ‘kufr’ (disobedience). There are some who claim that those who allow the use of ‘Allah’ by non-Muslims have shown their approval of disobedience to Allah. And that approval is sufficient to make them also disobedient.

Such a deduction is not accurate. We may differ on points of the issue but let us not conclude the matter based on nothing but fact. Muslims who allow Christians to use the names Jesus and Mary in churches should not be mistaken to have approved the Christian act of worshipping them alongside Allah. Nor should they be deemed as having approved the misuse of the name of Jesus.

This is not an issue of approval; rather it is an issue of what rights the non-Muslims have and what rights we must recognize. That is where the discussion should lie. We may agree or disagree with the decision to allow the use of Allah by non-Muslims. I do not wish to discuss that here, but I cannot accept the trend of labelling each other ‘kafir’ among Muslims. We need to approach the matter with reasoned harmony and maturity, not with unreasoned labelling of each other.

Be careful, dear readers, for there are many in this world who seek to manipulate statements and misconstrue them according to their desire in order to vilify a certain group of people. Each of us will stand on the Day of Judgement before Allah, so be just!

Translation by Umm Jaabir (weproofread4u.blogspot.com)

It is unfortunate that those known as devout or pious are actually very un-scholarly, though knowledge is the essence of Islam’s purity and authenticity. Of the qualities of being devoid of knowledge is to accuse others with baseless accusations when he is unable or refusing to answer questions raised by others. This mind-set is akin to the prevailing American government’s purview, which labels as terrorist any who criticizes them, albeit without any evidence.

The same phenomenon exists in Malaysia. If a person presents a religious opinion that is different than the common practice in Malaysia known to the local, traditional religious people, he will be labeled as a Wahhabi, even though he may not even have the slightest idea of what Wahhabi means. Nay, even the accusers rarely know the actual meaning of Wahhabi!

If we were to ask those who love to accuse others as Wahhabi, “Tell me, what is Wahhabi?” various answers will be uttered and heard. Some say Wahhabis are those who do not perform qunut in Fajr prayer.

If we were to tell them, “The other madhaahib (pl. madhhab (school of thought)) do the same. Then shall we call Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal and Imam Abu Hanifah as Wahhabis too?” They will only stay mum when posed with this question.

There are those who say, “Wahhabis do not perform tahlil.” We say, the meaning of tahlil is “Laa ilaaha illa Allah”, tahmid is “Alhamdulillah” and tasbih is “SubhanAllah”. According to our knowledge, the two imams (mentioned above) also uttered these words, because they would have been disbelievers otherwise. Besides, the imams in Saudi Arabia have excellent memorization of the Quran, and their recitations are listened to all over the world. Are these people disbelievers?

Some others say, “Wahhabis are those who studied in Saudi Arabia.” I say, I did not study in Saudi Arabia, but people still accuse me of Wahhabism. Also, if Wahhabi is truly deviated from the teachings of Islam, are Masjid al-Haram and Masjid an-Nabawi resided and led by the deviants then? Others also say that, “Wahhabi is a sect that do not subscribe to a madhhab.” We tell them that Saudi Arabia, which they accused of Wahhabism, subscribes to the Hanbali madhhab.

The more intelligent ones say, “Wahhabis are those who follow the teachings of Muhammad bin `Abd al-Wahhab,” hence the term Wahhabi for his followers. I say, throughout my rather brief experience, I am being accused as Wahhabi though I have only read a few of Muhammad bin `Abd al-Wahhab’s books.

For me, he was one of the prominent figure who benefited and sacrificed for the `ummah greatly. However, at the same time, he had his own weaknesses and mistakes. He was not one of the scholars of fiqh (jurisprudence), whose legal opinions were sought after; but he was himself a follower of the Hanbali madhhab. Also, he was not a scholar of hadith, such that al-Albani himself criticized him quite harshly. However, as a renowned person, he had his own contributions. Personally, I do not benefit a lot from him in terms of scholarly work. Nevertheless, his contributions cannot be denied and forgotten.

Dr Yusuf al-Qardhawi in his book, Fiqh al-Awlawiyyaat, praised him by saying:
“For al-Imām Muhammad bin `Abdul Wahhāb in the Arabian peninsula, `aqīdah (Islamic creed) was of his utmost importance in protecting the purity of tawhīd (oneness of Allah) which had been smeared and tainted by shirk (the act of ascribing partners to Allah). He had written books and treatises regarding this topic. He rose and carried the struggle through da`wah (inviting people to Islam), and was practical in destroying acts of shirk” (p. 263, Eqypt: Maktabah Wahbah)

In addition, Dr Wahbah al-Zuhaili also praised him when he said:
“A thing that is without a doubt in itself, realizing its actual truth, not intending to please others, will hold strong to the verse of the Noble Qur’ān:
“… do not deprive the people of their due…” [Surah Hūd 11:85];
that the bravest voice of truth, the greatest Islamic caller (dā`i) for islāh (reformation), in building the ummah, jihad (struggling) and guiding the Muslims to the way of the salafus sālih (pious predecessors) is the da`wah of Muhammad bin `Abd al Wahhāb in the 12th century Hijri. His objective was to revive (purify) the lives of the Muslims after being tarnished with various differences (khilāf), religious misunderstandings, bid`ah (religious innovations), and corruptions. Thus Muhammad bin `Abd al-Wahhāb was a leader of Islamic revivalism and reformation that was much anticipated, whom manifested the pure unadulterated `aqīdah..” (Dr Wahbah al-Zuhaili, p. 57-58, Risalah Mujaddid al-Deen fi Qarn al-Thaani `Ashr)

Furthermore, he honored him in many other occasions within the article. I am not sure whether other Muslim scholars who honor Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhab should be called Wahhabis or not?! Among the books that I have taught was a book of fiqh in the Shafi`i madhhab. I read al-Fiqh al-Manhaji `ala Mazhab al-Imam ash-Shafi`i as it is quite simple for the younger generation. However, when I discussed its contents, which are different than the current local practices, I am accused of Wahhabism.

However, this book (al-Fiqh al-Manhaji `ala Mazhab al-Imam ash-Shafi`i) is a book within the Shafi`i madhhab and the writers were scholars of Shafi`i madhhab such as as-Shaykh Mustafa Khin, as-Shaykh Mustafa al-Bugha, and `Ali as-Sharbaji. When I read some of the writings from the book,
“From the acts of bid`ah of the family of the deceased is to gather people and feed them, which is called (the celebration) of forty days and others. If the expenditure of the feast is from the inheritance (of the deceased) and if there exists among the inheritors those who have not reach puberty, then it is a strongly forbidden act. This is because it is eating from the wealth of the yateem (orphan) and decreasing the wealth of the children in a matter that is not in their interests. Included in committing this sinful act is those who invite to and eat (from the feast).” (1/263, Damsyik: Dar al-Qalam), I am accused of Wahhabism.

Are all writers Wahhabis then? They told me, “Do not read [that]! It is not the same with the local practices of the Shafi`i madhhab.” I asked: “Are there two Shafi`i madhhab?!” Very well, let us look at what was written in the old Malay transcripts. Shaykh Daud al-Fattani, rahimahullah (may Allah have mercy on him) said in Bughyah at-Talab:
“[and it is disliked and] furthermore, a bid`ah for the family of the deceased to prepare food and invite people to eat, whether it be before or after the burial, as practiced by many people, [and similarly, it is] disliked and an innovation for the invitees to accept such invitation.”

Such were also the words of as-Shaykh Muhammad Arshad al-Banjari in Sabil al-Muhtadeen. Similarly, al-Marbawi said in Bahr al-Mazi:
“Indeed, (it is) a disliked bid`ah” (7/130)

Are they then Wahhabis too?

When it was told that the local practice of Nisfu Sha`ban is not from the teachings of the Prophet, sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam, they said: “You are a Wahhabi!” Our reply is that this is not from the writings of Muhammad bin `Abdul Wahhab, rather this is the fatwa (religious verdict) of Dr. Yusuf al-Qardhawi when he was asked about Nisfu Sha`ban. He said:
“It has never been narrated from the Prophet, sallAllahu `alayhi wasallam, and his companions, radhiAllahu `anhum, that they gathered in the masjid to enliven the night of Nisfu Sha`ban by reading specific ad`iyah (pl. du`a) or performing specific salaah (prayer) like what we are seeing in some Muslim countries. Furthermore, in some countries, people gather on that night after the Maghrib prayer. They recite Yaseen and pray two raka`ah with the intention [or hope] of long life, and another two raka`ah for not being dependent on others, and then they read du`a that has never been recorded from the salaf (pious predecessors). It is an extremely long du`a that goes against the evidences from the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and also contradicting in their meanings… the gathering (of Nisfu Sha`ban) like what we see and hear happening in some Muslim countries is a religious innovation and a newly created thing. We are supposed to perform ‘ibadah based on what is taught from the evidences [of the Qur’an and Sunnah]. All good lies in following the salaf, and evil lies in religious innovations [created] by those after them, and everything that is newly created is an innovation, and every innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance lies in the Hellfire. (Dr. Yusuf al-Qardhawi, Fatawa Mu`asarah, 1/382-3, Beirut: Dar Uli an-Nuha).

Is he a Wahhabi too??!

Al-Imam an-Nawawi (d. 676H) was one of the great scholars of the Shafi`i madhhab. In his time, he opposed the practice of reading the Qur’an loudly while carrying a janazah (body of the deceased). He said:
“Know that the correct and selected practice practiced by the salafus-saalih was to be quiet while carrying a janazah. Do not raise your voice with Qur’anic recitation, dhikr and others. The wisdom is clear, it is to calm the heart and collect the mind to think about things related to the janazah. Such is the preferred practice in that situation. Indeed, Abu `Ali al-Fudhayl ibn `Iyadh rahimahullah once said, which means: ‘Hold onto the path of guidance, do not feel defeated by the small number of people following it. Stay away from the path of misguidance, do not be fooled by the large number of the misguided ones.’ Verily, what is being done by the ignorant people in Damascus, which is to prolong the recitation of the Qur’an and other kinds of recitation on the deceased and to talk about that which is not related [to the deceased], these are haram (prohibited) according to the ijma` `ulama (consensus of the scholars). Indeed, I have explained the bad manners of qira’ah (Qur’anic recitation), its ugliness, the greatness of its prohibition and its sinfulness for those who refuse to act against it when they are able to repudiate it.” (An-Nawawi, Al-Adhkar, pg. 225-6, Damascus: Maktabah al-Ghazali)

I believe that if Imam an-Nawawi was alive today and was to make this statement, the zealots of the local cultures would also accuse him of Wahhabism, especially when they read the statement of Imam an-Nawawi, which agrees with the views of other scholars in the Shafi`i madhhab in rejecting the party or gathering due to a death in the family. He said:
“The [practice of] preparing food by the family of the deceased and inviting and calling others to it were not at all related from the Prophet, sallAllahu `alayhi wasallam. It is a detested innovation.” (An-Nawawi, al-Majmu` Sharh al-Mahazzab, 5/320, Beirut: Dar al-Fikr)

There are various examples that could be mentioned. However, it is important to understand that in our country, the accusation of Wahhabism is in fact a slander in most cases. It is usually a spin-off or a diversion from an unanswered issue. This really shows the poor akhlaq (mannerism) and behavior of the accusers; to taint someone’s image with neither proper knowledge nor concrete evidence. These people will be held responsible on the Day of Judgment for twisting facts without a slight feeling of fear of Allah.

Don’t they read what Allah says in Surah al-Hujurat verses 11 and 12, which means:

“O you who have believed, let not a people ridicule [another] people; perhaps they may be better than them; nor let women ridicule [other] women; perhaps they may be better than them. And do not insult one another and do not call each other by [offensive] nicknames. Wretched is the name of disobedience after [one's] faith. And whoever does not repent – then it is those who are the wrongdoers. O you who have believed, avoid much [negative] assumption. Indeed, some assumption is sin. And do not spy or backbite each other. Would one of you like to eat the flesh of his brother when dead? You would detest it. And fear Allah; indeed, Allah is Accepting of repentance and Merciful.” [Surah al-Hujurat 49:11-12]

It is regrettable that the room for scholarly debate is converted into a space for vilifying others, especially when those involved are the religious personalities. We are supposed to limit ourselves to only facts and numbers, and stay away from throwing accusations without akhlaq. For example, we acknowledge that we took rulings from other than the Shafi`i madhhab in few cases. However, these are based on scholarly research or in reference to strong and valid opinions of other scholars. Even in Malaysia, many applied rulings are taken from other than the Shafi`i madhhab, especially in the area of Fiqh Mu`amalat.

An example is rulings related to Zakat in Malaysia. Nevertheless, it never means that we are insulting Imam as-Shafi`i. Sadly, there are parties who accused us of doing so, while I wrote about the greatness of Imam as-Shafi`i back in July 2004 in this magazine, as well as in my books. In fact, some even claimed that I intended to burn any madhhab-based manuscripts or books, and that this is Wahhabi. A`udhubillah! I seek refuge in Allah from all of these.

Indeed, Muhammad bin Salih al-`Ali spoke the truth when he said:
“It is a norm that fanaticism to a specific opinion or school of thought leads to harshness in dealings with people who contradict that opinions or school of thought. This happens to certain followers of fiqhi madhhab whose tongues are fast to speak ill of those who differed with them… The zealots are shielded from evaluating an issue with knowledge and being careful in his or her judgment. He sees nothing except the ugliness and mistakes of those different than him, hence leading him to be harsh and to criticize and hurt them…” (Muhammad bin Salih bin Yusud al-`Ali, Insaf Ahl as-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah, pg. 113-114, Jeddah: Dar al-Andalus al-Khadra’).

Many du`aat (pl. da`i) are disturbed with this repulsive manner. I, too, am frustrated and sympathize [with this problem]. It is even more frustrating when the accusers are those dubbed as members of an organization of religious scholars. However, I say to my humble self and other du`aat (pl. da`i) that are slandered, have patience.

The Messengers of Allah were slandered before, to the point that the Prophet, sallAllahu `alayhi wasallam, was accused as being a magician and a crazy person. Imam as-Shafi`i, rahimahullah, was accused as a supporter of Syi`ah in his time that he was punished because of it. Imam al-Bukhari, rahimahullah, was accused to have Mu`tazilite understanding with regard to the Qur’an, that he was expelled from his own village.

Such were the history and stories of the scholars; none escaped from the games of the envious and treacherous. Such is the requirement and the nature of da`wah, it calls for sincerity and sacrifice.

The day we commit ourselves to the da`wah to the way of Allah and His Messenger, sallAllahu `alayhi wasallam, we should expect the great challenges and trials. Without being accompanied by sincerity and intense love for Allah and His Prophet, sallAllahu `alayhi wasallam, we will fail one by one. Therefore, we have to realize this reality from the beginning. As we say, “If one fears to be carried away by the waves, then do not build a house by the shore”.

Some people claim that Wahhabis refuse to be tied to a particular madhhab. Subsequently, people who subscribe to other madhaahib in few matters are Wahhabis. We say that our highest respect and honor are with these madhaahib.

We do subscribe to the Shafi`i madhhab in many issues. Nevertheless, the accusers are, as described by Dr. Yusuf al-Qardhawi:

“Those who are infatuated [with subscribing to a specific madhhab] do not allow its followers to exit from it, even when it is clear to its adherents that the evidences used are inauthentic. This is then extended to conclude that those who leave a madhhab are weak-hearted. In essence, this is making obligatory something that Allah does not make obligatory. It seems that they think that the Imams of these schools of thought have the power to make the Shari`ah and that their words are religious evidences that are held and could never be challenged or disputed. This, in reality, conflicts the very teachings of those Imams, for verily, they have prohibited people from blindly following them or other people. This also disagrees with the stance of the salaf of this `ummah – the Companions, radhiAllahu ‘anhum ajma`een, and those who follow them through the earlier decades which were the best of decades and the closest to the guidance of the Prophet, sallAllahu `alayhi wasallam. Thus, the great scholars of this ummah and the researchers (muhaqqiq) oppose the act of blindly following a madhhab, as it is similar to the action of the People of the Book who took their monks and priests as their gods besides Allah.” (Dr Yusuf al-Qardhawi, Al-Sahwah al-Islamiyyah bain al-Ikhtilaf al-Masyru` wa al-Tafarruq al-Mazlum, pg. 202, Cairo: Dar al-Sahwah).

Perhaps they should include al-Qardhawi in their Wahhabi list just like how the Americans claimed of him.

In the field of hadith, we talk about what is called by the scholars of hadith as “to invalidate or to prove some of the hadith practiced by our society as fabricated”. For example, we quote the commentaries of scholars on Ihya `Ulum ad-Deen, not to degrade Imam al-Ghazali in any manner, but for our own reminders. Sadly, those who do not fear Allah accuse us of thinking that we are more knowledgeable than Imam al-Ghazali.

I am quoting what is published in my book, Menangkis Pencemaran Terhadap Agama dan Tokoh-tokohnya (Deflecting Adulterations on the Religion and Its Scholars), in early 2004. As an example here, we will talk about Ihya `Ulum ad-Deen written by Imam al-Ghazali, rahimahullah (d. 505H) in specific. This is because, it is the most prominent [book] and is often used in our society.

We have to realize that this book is not the only book that contains inauthentic and fabricated ahadith (pl. hadith), for there are many other books with the same problem. To criticize the inauthentic and fabricated ahadith in this book does not at all indicate that we deny the contribution of the writer as well as the noble values it contains. As a respected figure, it is undeniable that al-Ghazali had his own contributions.

Nevertheless, this does not allow us to hide the truth. We pray for the forgiveness and mercy of Allah on him and us. But the question of truth and knowledge should be explained. Allah says:

“O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both. So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just. And if you distort [your testimony] or refuse [to give it], then indeed Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted.” [Surah al-Ma’idah 5:135]

As mentioned by al-Hafidh adh-Dhahabi (d. 748H) when commenting on the mistakes in Ihya `Ulum ad-Deen:
“I say: al-Ghazali was a great imam, but it is not among the requirement of a great scholar to be free from mistake.” (Adh-Dhahabi, Siyar `Alam an-Nubala’, 19/339, Beirut: Muassasah ar-Risalah)

It is an established fact for anyone who studies the sciences of Hadith that Imam al-Ghazali was not an expert in the field of hadith, except for those who have no knowledge in this matter.

So much so that Taj ad-Deen as-Subki (d. 771H, a scholar in the Shafi`i madhhab), who defended Imam al-Ghazali staunchly in his book, at-Tabaqaat, too acknowledged this fact. He said:
“What is considered as a defect in the book al-Ihyaa was the weakness of some of its ahadith because al-Ghazali was not known as an expert in the field of hadith.” (Taj al-Din al-Subki, Tabaqat al-Syafi`yyah al-Kubra, 3/449, Beirut ar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah)

Let us look at some of the commentaries by the scholars of hadith of this ummah on Ihyaa `Ulum ad-Deen:

• Al-Hafidh Imam Ibn Katheer (d. 774H) in his book, al-Bidayah wa an-Nihayah, said: “when I was in Damsyik and Bait al-Maqdis, al-Ghazali wrote his book, Ihyaa `Ulum ad-Deen, which is a strange book. It contains immense knowledge on the religion, in addition to the softness of Tasawwuf and the practices of the heart. However, it also contains numerous Ghareeb (odd), Munkar (denied) and fabricated ahadith.” (Ibn Kathir, Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, 12/186, Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah)

• Al-Hafidh Imam Ibn al-Jawzee (d. 597H) said: “Then came Abu Hamid al-Ghazali who wrote the book al-Ihyaa for the Sufi sects based on their principles. He filled his book with inauthentic ahadith while he did not know its falsehood.” (Ibn Jauzi, Talbis Iblis, pg. 190, Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah)

• Al-Hafidh Imam adh-Dhahabi said: “Indeed, Ihyaa contains a number of inauthentic ahadith. If it does not include any manners, ways and Zuhd taken from the philosophers and deviated Sufi sects, it does have in it numerous benefits. We ask from Allah for beneficial knowledge. Do you know what is beneficial knowledge? It is what is stated in the Qur’an and explained by the Prophet sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam with his words or actions.” (Adh-Dhahabi, Siyar `Alam al-Nubala’, 19/339)

• Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taimiyyah (d. 728H) said: “Abu Hamid (al-Ghazali) does not have expertise in the ahadith of the Prophet sallAllahu `alayhi wasallam and the narrations of the salaf like the experts in these fields. They are able to differentiate between the authentic and inauthentic. Therefore, al-Ghazali mentioned fabricated and false ahadith and athar (sayings of the companions and the salaf) in his books, in which if he were to know about them, he would not have mentioned them.” (Ibn Taimiyyah, Dar`u Ta`arud al-`Aql wa al-Naql, 7/149, Riyadh: Dar al-Kunuz al-Adabiyyah).

Some then say, well, there are many other important issues [to focus on]. We say to that, alhamdulillah (all praises due to Allah), by Allah’s permission, we are among the earliest to address many important scholarly issues in this country, such as liberal Islam, Astora, Syi`ah and others.

We have numerous writings on those issues, and those are side issues that were discussed in order to answer questions addressed by the new generation who reads abundantly. However, your ears only hear that which you hate and are muted to that which you love. We ask for the forgiveness of Allah for us and for you.

Therefore, let us stay away from accusing and slandering others for these are signs of poor akhlaq and lowly personality. We are not as sad if the one who did it is “Shahrir Long”, but we will be very frustrated if the religious people, who should have good mannerism and self-dignity, are the ones that succumb to this.

Perhaps there are people who really want to be known as Wahhabi. But for us, we will say millions of time and more: “No to Wahhabi”.

Yes for Shafi`i, yes for Hanbali, yes for Maliki, yes for Hanafi, as long as there is no extremism and fanaticism. But “No to Wahhabi” for it does not have enough foundation to be indoctrinated as a school of thought.

This article was published in “Majalah i” by Karangkraf.

Translation by Umm Jaabir (weproofread4u.blogspot.com)

The coming of Dr Yusuf al-Qardawi to Malaysia was most welcomed. Though I was not able to attend his lecture yesterday morning, in which I was told he talked about his recent book, Fiqh al-Jihad, I had already purchased a copy few of months ago. This book is among his major work after Fiqh az-Zakaah.

I am among Dr Yusuf al-Qardawi’s admirers. It is not due to his name, but rather his intellectual scholarship. His books contain analytical values and very much free from any madhhab (school of thought) fanaticism. He is one of the respected reformers who calls toward the vastness of fiqh (jurisprudence), and the freedom of the mind from zealotry toward a scholar’s opinion, rather to analyze every opinion in justice based on the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

In his recent book, he mentioned about his methodology of writing:

“To benefit from the treasure of Islamic fiqh and to honor the vastness of its ocean are not by being inclined only to a madhhab, without looking at other madhaahib, or to limit oneself to an Imam, without looking at other Imams.

Rather, we acknowledge this great inheritance (of fiqh) is owned by every researcher, for him to delve deep into its core, to uncover its reserves, to dig in every corner, to compare an opinion with another, or an evidence with another, without being extreme to one opinion or continually following a madhhab blindly.

Moreover, sometimes we take from the opinions of Abu Hanifah, then Malik’s, then Shafi`i’s, then Ahmad’s and then Dawood’s (meaning Dawood adh-Dhahiri, the literalist). We may also, in few minor issues, leave the Sunni madhhab for Zaidiyyah or Ja`fariyyah or `Ibadiyyah madhhab, if we find in them the solution to our problem.

We may also take opinions from the lost madhaahib (pl. madhhab) such as those of al-‘Auza`ee, ath-Thawree and at-Tabaree. Furthermore, there are times when we leave all madhaahib to enter the spaciousness of fiqh (jurisprudence) of the Prophet, sallAllahu `alayhi wasallam, the tabi`een (followers of the Companions of the Prophet), and atba` at-tabi`een (followers of the followers of the Companions of the Prophet), all of whom did not subscribe to any madhhab. These are people like the Righteous Caliphs, Ibn Mas`ud, Ibn `Umar, Ibn `Abbas, `Aisha, Mu`adh, `Ubay ibn Ka`b, Zayd ibn Thaabit and the rest of the Companions, radhiyAllahu `anhum ajma`een.

This also includes their students, such as those known as the seven fuqahaa (experts of Islamic jurisprudence) of Madinah, as well as those in Makkah, Koofah, Basrah, Egypt, Shaam and other areas resided by the Companions and their students. Among them are: Sa`eed bin al-Musayyib, Sa`eed bin Jubayr, `Ikrimah, Mujaahid, `Ataa, Tawoos, al-Hasan al-Basree, Ibn Sireen, ‘Alqamah, al-Aswad, Masrooq, an-Nakha`ee, al-Layth ibn Sa`d, and others..” (Fiqh al-Jihad, 1/24, Cairo: Maktab Wahbah)

My thought is that, if there were people who wanted to hold onto such liberty of madhhab and intellectualism in Malaysia, surely there will be crowds who accuse them as “madhhab defiers”, or disrespecting the effort of our forefathers, or leaving the Shafi`i madhhab, or thinking that he is too smart, and others. Even more tragic is to be labeled as Wahhabi and deviated.

Perhaps this is why our religious opinions are rigid, and our new generation is not able to see the broadness of Islam due to our confined mindset. The so-called “respecting our fiqh treasures in Tanah Melayu (the Malay Federation)” is taken out of context to the extent that we forbid others to carefully study opinions from other madhaahib. We forget that such action causes us to exclude and deny the abundance of our scholarly resources from various schools of thought existed in this ummah. The fault is not at ascribing to a madhhab, rather the fanaticism in ascribing to a certain madhhab, such that anything different is wrong, and the refusal of evaluating the currently practiced opinion merely because “this is our madhhab!”

For that reason, Dr Yusuf al-Qardawi mentioned while talking about Manhaj Mu`asir li al-Fatwa (The Current Method in [Giving] Fatwa), that the first issue is to “release one self from fanaticism and blind following”. He said:

“Firstly, to free oneself from madhhab fanaticism and blindly following a person, whether he is among the past or present scholars. It was said that ‘a person does not blindly follow another except that he is a fanatic or an idiot.’

I will not let myself succumb to one of these characteristics. To free oneself from madhhab fanaticism is actually the greatest honor for the imams and the faqeeh (Muslim jurist). To not follow them blindly is not dishonoring them; rather it fully agrees with their methods and executes their will, which was to not follow them blindly.

We take the religion from the resources that they took (al-Qur’an and as-Sunnah). Also, to not blindly follow them does not mean that we are neglecting their fiqh and legacies. On the contrary, we should refer to them and benefit from the various schools of thought, without prejudice or fanaticism. This view does not require a Muslim scholar to have an independent understanding that reaches the level of absolute ijtihad (to exhaust all of one’s effort in studying a problem thoroughly and seek a solution for it from the legal sources – the Qur’an and the Sunnah) like the previous imams or scholars.” (al-Qardawi, al-Fatwa bayn al-Indibad wa at-Tasaiyub, pg. 101, Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami)

Phrases such as “freedom of knowledge” and the “freedom from the shackle of extreme zealotry” are strongly detested by some groups. They have been controlled by fanaticism for so long that they would never ask or question anything taught by their teachers and subsequently, their religious mindsets become idle and exhausted by current challenges.

Nevertheless, these groups still insist on inheriting the “religious empire”, whose leaders are not to be questioned, or their views be revised. These people then gave the fatwa of “one who leaves a madhhab is deviated,” or “one who asks too many questions or criticize our views or our customs is being rude.” Moreover, any who tries to understand Islam in a different manner than what was explained to them, then “he is deviated and have fallen outside the fold of Ahlus Sunnah (the people of Sunnah).”

For them, it is as if all the scholars of Islam from other madhaahib are astray and not from among Ahlus Sunnah such that we are prohibited from studying, understanding and taking their researches! This issue worsens when the tareeqah sects thrive in our country of late. Many among the tareeqah members who hold on the tradition of “don’t ask, just follow” are extremely angered at the new movement, which demands for the minds to be functional in practicing this religion. Islam is a religion of fitrah (natural inclination/conscience) and balance. The mind is of utmost importance in Islam such that the crazy or the person whose mind has not reach maturity will not be judged with sins or rewards.

Ibn Taymiyyah

Although al-Qardawi is not fanatical toward any figure or scholar, it definitely does not indicate the he does not have the most beloved or most respected scholar. Dr al-Qardawi once said:

“Al-Imam Ibn Taimiyyah is from amongst the scholars of the ummah that I love. Perhaps he may be the most beloved to me of them all, and the closest to my way of thinking.” (Al-Qardawi, Kayf Nata`amul ma`a as-Sunnah, pg. 170, Egypt: Dar al-Wafa).

Almost all of his books are filled with the works of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taimiyyah (d. 728H) and his student, Imam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (d. 751H). This is because, these two renowned scholars were known with their efforts in reforming the ummah and liberating them from fanaticism, rigidity, and the laziness to think.

Al-Qardawi said in ath-Thaqafah al-`Arabiyyah al-Islamiyyah:

“Ibn Taimiyyah and his institution are salafis. They are truly the revivalists. None tries to deny their ideas and thoughts in revivalism, except that he is an obstinate.” (p. 59, Cairo: Maktab Wahbah)

Groups that are madhhab fanatics like the Ahbash disapprove of him (al-Qardawi) because he often refers to Ibn Taimiyyah. Al-Qardawi said:

“Included amongst the odd things is that the Ahbash vilify me as a Wahhabi and zealous with the imams of Wahhabi because often times, I quote a lot from Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim and their schools when I talk, while they (the Ahbash) accused Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim as contradicting the ijma` in this and that matters…”

In Malaysia, anti-Ibn Taimiyyah groups thrive in some pondok (madrasah-type school), religious department and few other institutions. Some appear in TV and newspaper declaring Ibn Taimiyyah deviated, and furthermore a disbeliever. If they were to read the writing of al-Qardawi, surely the same accusations would fall on him.

Therefore, al-Qardawi too does not escape from being vilified. He was accused as a liberalist, Wahhabi, and others. These accusations originated from various groups, such as the madhhab fanatics, tareeqah fanatics, as well as the rigid and narrow-minded salafis. In addition, there are books that labeled him as “the barking dog”.

At the same time, the Western world too initiated animosity against him. This is because he works for Islam, [by means of] writing, delivering talks and lectures and planning. Prior to becoming a “giant” and renowned personality, al-Qardawi was jailed. Even more so, there are countries that deny him entrance into their countries. Such are the days that lies ahead for those working on da`wah and revivalism. A scholar or a repute person will remain as such, and there will be others that will come to his defense.

Translation by Umm Jaabir (weproofread4u.blogspot.com)

Several individuals had suggested that I briefly expound in my column regarding what was mentioned last week by a tarekat (Sufi sect) activist that had commented on my arrest.

Personally, it is a norm for these tarekat followers to feel antsy with me because few of my previous articles contained criticisms on the culture of blind-following (taklid buta) or the abandonment of rational thinking, which is very common in many tarekat groups where its followers would perform anything instructed by their “shaykh” (leader) without questioning the basis of such command.

However, the more frequently asked question is “who are the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah?” Since this ‘branding’ is very popular, whereby it is even used as a ‘weapon’ by some, we then find many quarters claiming absolute ownership of this phrase. Whomever oppose them or dare question their legitimacy would be deemed deviated and expelled from Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah. These folks’ mentality only reminds us of the words of Napoleon Bonaparte: “I am France and France is me.”

Given this, many people would proudly claim subscribing to Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah; although if asked to explain the definition of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah, they will stagger and struggle in providing an answer. Or even if answered, it will be according to their terms and interests.
Also making this claim are the tarekat groups known for various claims including the concept of “wahdatul ujud” (the unity of God and creations) which was popularized and espoused by Ibn `Arabi.

Even more pathetic are those who claimed “Ahlus Sunnah are only those who follow the Shāfi`i madhhab (school of thought).” If that is the case, then it is implied that the great imāms such as al-Imām Abu Hanīfah, al-Imām Mālik, and al-Imām Ahmad are all not considered from among Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah!

So much so, that even those that do not perform qunūt (in Fajr or Subh prayer) are expelled from Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah. Thus, approximately three fourth of the Muslim ummah are no longer from Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah.

All aside, the term Sunnah refers to the Sunnah of the Prophet salAllāhu `alayhi wasallam, which includes the understanding of al-Qur’ān and as-Sunnah. Therefore, the people of Sunnah (Ahlus Sunnah) are those who grasp and practice this very understanding. While the term Jamā`ah refers to the Companions (Sahābahs) of the Prophet salAllāhu `alayhi wasallam. In other words, it is the understanding of al-Qur’ān and as-Sunnah according to the practice and understanding of the greatest generation of Islam, whom are the Sahābahs. Those who are convinced with full certainty that al-Qur’ān and as-Sunnah is the ultimate source of reference, and the understanding of the Sahabahs is their source of guidance, then they are the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah (see al-Mawsū’āt al-Muyassarah fi al-Adyān wa al-Madhāhib wa al-Ahzāb al-Mu’āsarah, pages 40-54, World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY)).

Therefore, even with multiple differences of opinion within the fiqhi (Islamic jurisprudence) madhhab, these differences do not cause them to fall out from Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah. As mentioned by `Abd al-Qāhir al-Baghdādi (died 429H): “It is from among them (Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah) those who follow al-Imām Mālik, al-Imām Shāfi’i, al-Awzā`i, ath-Thawri, Abu Hanīfah, ibn Abi Layla, Abi Thawr, Ahmad bin Hanbal, Ahli Żāhir (literalists) and those who adhere to using the intellect (rationalists) based on the principles of tawhīd ŝifāt. They do not mix and add from religious innovations (bid`ah) of the people of hawā’ (desire) and those misguided” (al-Baghdādi, al-Farq bayn al-Firāq, pages 314-315, Beirut: Dār al-Ma`rifah).

From this, we see that even madhhab Żāhiri (the literalists’ school of thought) whom only subscribe to literal evidences (żahir nās) are categorized as Ahlus Sunnah. Then, is a person taken one out of the fold of Ahlus Sunnah by not performing qunūt (in Fajr prayer), putting the hands on the chest while praying, and not making group dhikr after congregational prayers?!

In the Utusan interview, the JAIS (Islamic Religious Department of Selangor) representative had mentioned that among the deviant characteristics are those who mentioned the breakdown of tawhīd (Islamic monotheism) into Rubūbiyyah, Ulūhiyyah, and Asmā’ was Ŝifāt. However, in the characteristics of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamā`ah as explained by the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), in the course syllabus from the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM), and in the school curriculum in Malaysia and the majority of universities in the world, this is the categorization that is being taught and explained in understanding the tawhīd of Ahlus Sunnah.

Ever since my primary school days, that has been the content of the `aqīdah (Islamic creed) of Ahlus Sunnah taught, whether in my Islamic study circle (usrah), in the `aqīdah book of the PAS president, in the UMNO-led government school books, in the Arab states, the United Kingdom, the USA, and Europe.

Today, the JAIS representative in his interview had stated that this is not the `aqīdah of Ahlus Sunnah, and furthermore, likened it to the `aqīdah of the idol-worshipper. As a conclusion, it is said to be related to Wahhabism. If so, then all of us had become Wahhabis all these while.

I am saddened to see religious leaders who have became careless in easily making takfīr (declaring others to be outside the fold of Islam) and haphazardly declaring others as deviants, in order to protect their interest and status, while in the end, it is the ummah that gets destroyed. Allow me to share the words of Professor Hamka: “Sometimes it is stated that Kaum Muda shows no respect to the Muslim scholars. In reality, those whom they claimed as scholars are not Imām Mālik or Imām Shāfi`i but several government officials that don the turban and long robes (jubah). And they deem themselves as scholars because they hold certification letters (surat tauliah) in their hands.” (Hamka, Noble and Sincere Advice for the Mufti of Johor, page 66).

From the certification (tauliah) issue, the subject gets shifted to Wahhabi. Anyone who opined differently than those with religious authority will be automatically labeled as Wahhabi.

Last week, the Director of JAIS stated that non-Muslims are not allowed to enter the mosque (masjid) because they are viewed to be the same as menstruating women. It is amazing how this type of religious edict (fatwa) is issued at a time when vast majority of non-Muslims do not have the proper understanding of Islam.

In the time of the Prophet salAllāhu `alayhi wasallam, all the Muslim and non-Muslim delegations whether Jews, Christians or others, would meet with the Prophet salAllāhu `alayhi wasallam inside the mosque. They learned and understood Islam from the mosque and conducted affairs with the Islamic government inside the mosque. This was mentioned in numerous narrations (ahadīth, plural of hadīth).

If the Director of JAIS subscribes to the view that I deem as weak and less favorable to Muslims in Malaysia, does it make me a Wahhabi and misguided if I decided to choose the opinion of the scholars stating that non-Muslims can enter the mosque if there is valid reasoning? What if, by the grace of Allah Almighty, that I am granted the position of authority in the future, then should his (Director of JAIS) view be taken as Wahhabi and deviated at that time?! Such is the corruption of the religion when it becomes a tool for the lustful desire and vested interests!

I am not an avid fan of the works of Muhammad bin `Abd al-Wahhāb (died 1115H). I am more inclined to Dr Yūsuf al-Qaradāwi whom stated that Ibn Taymiyyah (died 728H) is very dear to his heart. The same applies to me as well. Nevertheless, I can never accept the irresponsible habit of making takfīr and loosely declaring religious scholars as deviants, which is happening nowadays. Even if I am not an adherent of the Māliki madhhab, I would strongly refute and condemn those who defame al-Imām Mālik bin Anas, because it is incumbent (wājib) upon every Muslim to defend their Muslim brethren who is being oppressed, let alone the Muslim scholars.

Though not a follower of Muhammad bin `Abd al-Wahhāb, I will not allow that he be defamed, insulted, and denounced from being a Muslim. Not to mention of its huge implication. Those adamant in claiming Wahhabi as deviants and being outside the fold of Islam will result by declaring Saudi Arabia in particular and several other Arab states as deviants in the end, and possibly kāfir (disbeliever). Originating from Lebanon, they have their own hidden agenda and have now made progress in having their agents present in this country. Their modus operandi is to instigate the culture of takfīr within the ummah. This will be further elaborated in future articles.

Recently, IIUM hosted a highly distinguished guest and a renowned scholar `Abd Allah bin `Abd al-Muhsin al-Turki, Secretary-General of Muslim World League, during the International Conference on Jurisprudence of Minorities in the Light of Maqāsid ash-Sharī`ah.

In his writing Mujmal I`tiqād A’immah as-Salaf, this prominent figure praised the `aqīdah and struggle of Muhammad bin `Abd al-Wahhāb. He wrote: “ash-Shaykh Muhammad bin `Abd al-Wahhāb was consistent and steadfast in calling the people towards a pure and refined `aqīdah. With tawhīd, he repelled shirk; with knowledge, he extinguished superstitious beliefs” (page 105, Beirut: Mu’assasah ar-Risālah).

Dr Yūsuf al-Qaradāwi also praised him (Muhammad bin `Abd al-Wahhāb) in Fiqh al-Awlawiyyāt. He wrote: “For al-Imām Muhammad bin `Abdul Wahhāb in the Arabian peninsula, `aqīdah is of utmost importance to him, that is to protect the purity of tawhīd, which had been smeared and tainted by shirk. He had written books and treatises regarding this topic. He rose and carried the struggle through da`wah, and was practical in destroying acts of shirk” (page 263, Egypt: Maktabah Wahbah).

Another prominent Muslim jurist (faqih) of this era, whose views are often referred to, is Dr Wahbah az-Zuhaili. He said: “It is without doubt that he, realizing the whole truth, not intending to please anyone, held strong to the verse of the Noble Qur’ān:

“… do not deprive the people of their due…” (Surah Hūd 11:85);

that the bravest voice of truth, the greatest Islamic caller (dā`i) to revivalism and reformation (iŝlāh) in building the ummah, fighting in the way of Allah and returning the Muslims to the way of the salāfus ŝālih (pious predecessors) is the da`wah of Muhammad bin `Abd al Wahhāb in the 12th century Hijri. His objective was to revive (purify) the lives of the Muslims after being tarnished with various differences (khilāf), religious misunderstandings, bid`ah (religious innovations), and corruptions. Thus Muhammad bin `Abd al-Wahhāb was a leader of Islamic revivalism and reformation (iŝlāh) that was much anticipated, whom manifested the pure unadulterated `aqīdah..” (reference: Dr Wahbah az-Zuhaili, Risālah Mujaddid ad-Dīn fi Qarn ath-Thāni `Ashar, pages 57-58).

Once again, a question that I had posed in the past, are all of them to be considered Wahhabi for praising Muhammad bin `Abd al-Wahhāb? Will they be labeled as such if they are to give lectures in this country because they hold no ‘certification’? Or perhaps they are not entitled for ‘certification’ since they have elements of Wahhabism?

Throughout history, resulting from the ploys of the religious authorities, al-Imām Ahmad bin Hanbal was notoriously punished by the ruler’s `ulamā (religious scholars) of his time. Al-Imām al-Bukhāri also faced similar predicament. The term Wahhabi has surfaced as a scary boogeyman, used by the elders in the past to frighten the children.

Therefore, it is irrelevant whether the ghost actually exists or not, whether the elders have witnessed it or not, or even seen its physical look. What is important is that the children are fearful of it while the elders can comfortably lounge around and converse in the coffee shop, laughing all the way until the morning.

Translation by Umm Jabir (weproofread4u.blogspot.com)

In the context of Western journalism, the word ‘Wahhabi’ has many connotations. All of them lead to an understanding that it is an Islamic movement perceived as strictly following the legal opinions and evidences (nas) from al-Quran and as-Sunnah in its literal sense, while refusing to consider the more modern or ‘western-influenced’ interpretations. Clinton Bennet grouped ‘Wahhabis’ and Deobandis under the ‘traditionalist’ school of thought, and therefore among the ‘fundamentalists’ (refer to: Muslim and Modernity 18-20, London: Continuum).

Some western writers perceive Wahhabi as a movement that deems ‘Islam as the only true religion’, or that establishing an ‘Islamic State’ is obligatory, or that ‘Jihad’ is to fight the infidels or disbelievers, and other ‘desert-related’ (such as Bedouins or Arab nomads) qualities, which they eventually attempt to associate with terrorism.

Yet in Malaysia, the word ‘Wahhabi’ is such a mysterious term. Many use the term or slander others by it, without a clue of its meaning. They merely regard it as a tool to defend themselves against criticisms. I still remember an incident involving a Tok Imam (the person who leads the congregational prayer) in one of the Northern states; when he was criticized for manipulating the religion to serve his personal interest for demanding fees for his prayer and dhikr (remembrance of Allah), he simply retorted, “Those who disagree with me are Wahhabis”. It might be the case that the person who just advised him was not exposed to a lot of information and it was the first time he encountered the word. Thus, looking perplexed, he asked back, “What is a Wahhabi?” The Tok Imam answered, “A Wahhabi is a person who criticizes his Ustaz (Islamic teacher).” Thereafter, this person i.e. the one giving advice dared not to disagree with the Tok Imam and questioned the infallibility of the Ustaz lest he would become a Wahhabi.

In some places, a person is accused as a Wahhabi for disagreeing with superstitious rituals and beliefs (khurafat). This include hanging pictures of certain individuals like the Sultan or a Sheikh believing that it brings good charm or increases their earnings, or tying black thread on a newborn’s hand believing that it will protect the baby from bad luck, and many other erroneous beliefs beleaguering/haunting part of our society. Unfortunately, the so-called ‘Ustaz’ endorses some of these practices, and furthermore, they themselves are the initiator of these practices. When people begin to criticize the practice, they will simply say, “You are Wahhabi,” acting in self-defense.
Similarly, those who disagree with the practice of ‘kenduri arwah’ (feast gathering in commemorating the deceased) are also labeled as Wahhabi. This is despite the fact that an old and traditional Malay manuscript, Bughyah al-Talab, by Shaykh Daud al-Fatani mentioned that: “[and it is disliked and] furthermore, it is an innovation (Bid’ah) for the family of the deceased to prepare food and invite people to eat, whether it be before or after the burial, as practiced by many people, [and similarly, it is] disliked and an innovation for the invitees to accept such invitation.” Even if they cannot accept their own justification why should they feel infallible, and further prohibit others from differing with them by using the “You are wahhabi” slogan as a weapon?

On the other hand, some other religious people narrate and spread rejected narrations, such as Israeliyyat, which contradict evidences and legal opinions in Islam, or fabricated Hadeeth or stories of righteous people or Sufi, which introduces confusion over the beauty and excellence of Islam. Some narrate these stories in their talks, while others use them as capital or the selling point for their business ventures. Alas, Islam is tainted with such stories and consequently, this honorable religion appears comical and absurd. If these speakers are critiqued, they would say, “You are Wahhabi”, though the critic may have never read a single book by Muhammad bin ‘Abdul Wahhab.

It is even worse when religious authorities manipulate the issue of Wahhabi. In this case, any teacher who teaches the Quran and authentic Hadeeth will be labeled as a Wahhabi and prevented from teaching at any mosques and Surau if he disagrees with the confusions introduced by many of the religious officers or their colleagues who join a Tariqah (Tarekat) sect, or those who spread fabricated and funny narrations. This is imposed under the pretext of the Sultan’s decree or order.

At the same time, countless obvious sinful and evil practices are left undisturbed while they busy themselves with the revivalists who pose no absolute threat to the society. If there is, it will only be a threat to the rigid and archaic mindset, not the society. To justify their obsession with this group to the extent that obvious evils are abandoned, they would argue: “This is much more threatening, this is Wahhabi”. What is Wahhabi? They say, “Wahhabi is Wahhabi!” This attitude is aggravated by the emergence of the Ahbash sect, which is a group of people whom haphazardly accuse some Muslims as disbelievers and collaborate with certain religious groups [hence influencing these groups].

At a more advanced level, the term Wahhabi is targeted at those who free themselves from the Shafi’i school of thought. They claim that people who do not follow any school of thought are Wahhabis. I have explained the evidences and legal opinions from Muslim scholars pertaining to this issue in previous articles.

As mentioned by Dr al-Qardhawi precisely:
“Those who are infatuated [with subscribing to a specific school of thought] do not allow its followers to exit from it, even when it is clear to its adherents that the evidences used are inauthentic. This is then extended to conclude that those who leave a school of thought are weak-hearted. In essence, this is making obligatory something that Allah does not make obligatory. (Dr. Yusuf al-Qardhawi, Al-Sahwah al-Islamiyyah bain al-Ikhtilaf al-Masyru’ wa al-Tafarruq al-Mazmum, p. 202, Cairo: Dar al-Sahwah).

Interestingly in Malaysia, these same people would actually give consent to rulings and opinions that are not affiliated with any school of thought, as bank ‘advisors’, to enable the bank to operate as an Islamic bank. Rather, many of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taimiyyah’s (rahimahullah) opinions are accepted in the matter of financial transactions, as his opinions are extensively employed in advancing the Muslim societies all over the world. Ironically, outside of these paid-bank-meetings, they would accuse Ibn Taimiyyah and those who subscribe to his views as Wahhabis. In addition, they even collaborate with those who accuse Ibn Taimiyyah of disbelief or deviant.

Such is the situation when I was a Mufti. When I gave my opinions such as the prohibition of spying (Tajassus), the permissibility to reply to the greeting of Salaam from a non-Muslim, the obligation to name a child after the father even if the father is a non-Muslim, or building a mosque for the Chinese, being tolerant in accepting different views, and others, they are labeled as Wahhabi-like or ideologies by certain religious groups. In contrast, these opinions would be considered as modernist or rationalist views, in which the opponents may be grouped as Wahhabi.

The opposite is seen in Malaysia. That which is open or tolerant is Wahhabi and deviated, while that which is narrow or constricted is the absolute truth. Such is the mindset of the religious authorities within the government, which swiftly weakens the existing strength within the government. This is also the mindset of certain religious groups within the opposition parties. In effect, throughout the 50 years of independence, Muslims have become stagnant in their religious understanding; on the contrary, Muslims have become increasingly confused and intolerant when it comes to Islam.

Their actions remind me of an article by David Brubaker, ‘Fundamentalism vs. Modernism: A Consideration of Causal Conditions’, which mentioned that the move against reformation mainly refers to the survival of a particular group. For them to remain alive and secure within the society and government, the reformers shall be totally opposed. For me, the issue is not Wahhabi, but the insecurity over losing support and status. On the other hand, whenever they feel that there is opportunity to increase in status, like in the Islamic banking scenario, they are able to accept differences without accusing the bank that pays for their monthly and meeting allowances as a ‘Wahhabi bank’.

David Brubaker said, in order to survive, they are forced to choose between two options, accommodation or resistance. Consequently, many are accused as Wahhabis in Malaysia, although in reality, it is a mysterious accusation. I am not denying that some of those accused as Wahhabis may have to be more broadminded in certain matters. Nevertheless, to label others as Wahhabi merely due to differences in opinions is indeed a full-blown backward mentality for someone living in the globalize world.

Translated by Shabana Zahir Ahmad
Edited by Umm Hajar

The Malay community commonly associates Hari Raya with melancholia. This inclination is being stimulated further by our media. When Hari Raya comes, takbir (saying Allahu Akbar) is delivered the Malay style with melancholic tune, its melody exudes sadness and invites tears, the dramas and stories presented by the media are linked up to sad and sorrowful stories. The same trend is also being adopted in Hari Raya poems and songs. In Islam, is Hari Raya a day for sorrow or is it a day to celebrate victory and joy?

Firstly, we have to be aware of the fact that in Islam, Hari Raya is not a mere tradition or that it is an idea thought of by a specific party. Hari Raya was decreed by Allah and it has its own distinctive rules. It is the day that Allah has allocated for Muslims to glorify Allah, to celebrate victory and joy.

Allah says (translated as):

“The month of Ramadân in which was revealed the Qur’ân, a guidance for mankind and clear proofs for the guidance and the criterion (between right and wrong). So whoever of you sights (the crescent on the first night of) the month (of Ramadân i.e. is present at his home), he must observe Saum (fasts) that month, and whoever is ill or on a journey, the same number [of days which one did not observe Saum (fasts) must be made up] from other days. Allâh intends for you ease, and He does not want to make things difficult for you. (He wants that you) must complete the same number (of days), and that you must magnify Allâh [i.e. to say Takbîr (Allâhu-Akbar; Allâh is the Most Great) on seeing the crescent of the months of Ramadân and Shawwâl] for having guided you so that you may be grateful to Him.” (Surah al-Baqarah: verse 185).

This verse describes Hari Raya as the way for us to display our gratitude for all the favors that our Lord has bestowed upon us. Because of that, we are taught to recite the takbir and worship Allah on Hari Raya. All these are the symbols of success and happiness.

Additionally, there are many hadith illustrating that the celebration of Hari Raya performed during Prophet’s time was full of joy and cheerfulness. Ummu Atiyyah r.aha said:

“We used to be ordered to come out on the Day of ‘Id and even bring out the virgin girls from their houses and menstruating women so that they might stand behind the men and say Takbir along with them and invoke Allah along with them and hope for the blessings of that day and for purification from sins.” (Reported by Bukhari)

Prophet Muhammad pbuh would traditionally perform Hari Raya prayer outdoors so that everyone would be able to participate in celebrating the victory and joy of that day. More importantly, the celebration is to display the strength, unity, success and happiness of the Muslims’ life.

Takbir on the Idul Fitri was delivered in an enthusiastic manner unlike the melancholic takbir being practiced by our Malay community. Try to listen to the takbir sounded in the Arab world and you can notice the different rhythm.

Also, when it comes to entertainment, Islam allows Muslims to rejoice in any way that they wish to as long as there is no transgression to the Islamic ruling. Islam is a noble religion that acknowledges the diverseness of the human soul. Entertainment is not an essential but whenever there is a need for it, it can help someone to enjoy life in certain conditions. It is alright if one does not desire it but we cannot prevent others from enjoying it.

Hari raya is a day of happiness. Entertainment that is bound in good disciplines and good manners enhances its jubilation and subsequently, brings out the gloriousness of this celebration.

Narrated Aisha: Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) came to my house while two girls were singing beside me the songs of Buath (a story about the war between the two tribes of the Ansar, the Khazraj and the Aus, before Islam). The Prophet (p.b.u.h) lay down and turned his face to the other side. Then Abu Bakr came and spoke to me harshly saying, “Musical instruments of Satan near the Prophet (p.b.u.h) ?” Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) turned his face towards him and said, “Leave them, Abu Bakr! Every race has their festive day and today is our Hari raya day.” (Reported by Bukhari and Muslim)

In another narration by Muslim, it is said that they beat the drums to accompany their singings.

The mellow attitude demonstrated by our Prophet pbuh was indeed appealing. Just imagine, how was it possible for these two girls to sing in the Prophet’s house? If the Prophet is a fierce and a rigid man, they would not dare to sing and beat the drum in his house right from the beginning.

Also, notice his reaction when Abu Bakr scolded them. He did not keep quiet but instead, he voiced his opinion that those were all permitted in Islam.

There is a view stating that the Prophet pbuh did not object the opinion voiced by Abu Bakr about singing being the voice of the devils and that he only allowed it specifically for that day since it was Hari Raya. This is a peculiar opinion. Just because it is the Hari Raya, it is permitted to listen to the devil’s voice? Or, is singing is not considered as the devil’s voice during Hari Raya but its status will change into the devil’s voice when Hari Raya has passed by? The Prophet’s reprehension stated in that hadith was a general objection to Abu Bakr’s statement.

The same hadith was also reported by Bukhari with the following narration to show the vastness of the teachings of Islam. Aishah narrated:

“It was the day of ‘Id, and the Black people were playing with shields and spears; so either I requested the Prophet (p.b.u.h) or he asked me whether I would like to see the display. I replied in the affirmative. Then the Prophet (p.b.u.h) made me stand behind him and my cheek was touching his cheek and he was saying, “Carry on! O Bani Arfida,” till I got tired. The Prophet (p.b.u.h) asked me, “Are you satisfied (Is that sufficient for you)?” I replied in the affirmative and he told me to leave.” (Reported by Bukhari)

The performance mentioned in the above hadith actually took place inside the Prophet’s mosque as described by other narration by Bukhari and Muslim. Therefore, the fairly narrow view and constricted opinion that limits entertainment only for Hari raya in fact constrains the way life’s daily affair should be conducted whereas Islam provides ample freedom for that.

Entertainment is not like specific ibadah which cannot be added or modified. Its fundamental ruling is “allowable” or falls within the general consent of Islamic rulings which is only to be forbidden when there is textual evidence supporting it. Entertainment is not like specific ibadah which cannot be added on.

Entertainment is an embodiment of human creativity and invention that is widely permitted as long as it does not contradict the principles and laws decreed by Islam.

Moreover, when the Prophet affirmed his consent on that day, he said:

“So that the Jewish will know that there is vastness of choice in our religion. Indeed, I was sent to advocate a direct and easy religion.” (Reported by Ahmad, ranked as sahih by al-Albani)

Today, many people think of Islam as a narrow and stiff religion. At the same time, the West and the Jews are also charging Islam with similar accusations. The Prophet pbuh provided ample freedom in expressing joyousness and in enjoying entertainment so as to avoid Islam being accused and slandered with such claims.

What I am trying to convey is that Hari Raya in Islam is a happy day, not a sad and gloomy day unlike the pictures being projected by the dramas and songs that are televised close to the festive day. Any activities which can stimulate happiness and do not contradict the Islamic laws are encouraged on Hari Raya. These include indulging in good food, visiting others, giving out money and gifts as well as getting involved in singing and other types of entertainment. Islam is a straight religion but easy and practical for human life.

It is unfortunate that in our society, in certain conditions; a sad day such as the death of a person is treated as if it is a joyful day with the preparation of a banquet, giving out money to those performing prayers to the deceased and various other things as if we are celebrating the death. Those are a part of the Islamic teachings. On the other hands, when are encouraged to be happy on Hari Raya, we submerge ourselves in melancholic tunes and dramas, crying at the grave and many more. We purposely reverse the condition. Hari Raya is not a gloomy day. Like the Prophet pbuh said: ““So that the Jewish will know that there is vastness of choice in our religion. Indeed, I was sent to advocate a direct and easy religion.”

Tajdid or the process of renewal to the religious comprehension is a necessity. Throughout the history of this ummah, the movement or the struggle of tajdid was instrumental in preventing the ummah from becoming weak and incompetent. In a sahih hadith reported by al-Imam Abu Daud, the Prophet s.a.w said: “Allah will raise for this community at the end of every hundred years someone who will restore its religion for it.”

All through the time, advocates of tajdid appeared one after another to carry out various endeavors and to confront different challenges. Tajdid was implemented in various fields for the wellbeing of the ummah. Caliphate ‘Umar bin ‘Abd al-‘Aziz was a prominent advocate of tajdid (mujaddid) based on the consensus of the ummah. After him, other scholars who were regarded as mujaddid appeared such as al-Imam al-Syafi’i (deceased in 204H), al-Imam Ibn Taimiyyah (deceased in 728H) and others.

The word ‘man’ or ‘someone’ as stated in the hadith above instigated different interpretations among the scholars. They debated whether the hadith implied that ‘someone’ will be sent for every century or a number of individuals will be sent but spread all over the place and in different countries, or if it implied any particular movement or the likes of it. Whatever it may be, it is more important to derive from this hadith that tajdid in Islam is necessary.

Tajdid does not denote the establishment of a new religion. There are two different definitions that can be assigned to tajdid. The first definition is to restore the religion’s original look just as we would restore the condition of something that has gone bad or has expired. Renewal or tajdid means that the situation and time renders it necessary to restore something to its original form. A practical exemplar is the renewal of our driving license or something similar. Basically, we have the original driving license but it has to undergo a renewal process because it is old or expired.

The second definition of tajdid is that it can also imply the innovation of certain element to fulfill contemporary need and requirement such as the innovation of modern vehicle. It has never been created before but it serves the same basic purpose required by humankind since the earliest of time that is to move from one place to another.

Therefore, in the context of Islam, innovation should be performed such that it does not change the religion but rather, it is to satisfy the new understanding or view brought about by the change in circumstances. However, it should not deviate from the essence and the requirement of al-Quran and al-Sunnah. In other words, the renewal of Islam refers to the restoration of the original look of Islam that is being practiced by the ummah because the look of Islam has been contaminated or neglected as time passes by and as circumstance varies. It can also refer to the construction of new understanding and new view to meet the contemporary requirement but is still centered upon the al-Quran and al-Sunnah.

In another hadith, the Prophet s.a.w said:

“This knowledge must be carried by those who are righteous among the successors (from one generation to another). They deny (oppose) the deviance performed by the extremists, the false claims made by the immorals and the interpretation done by the ignorants.” (Reported by al-Baihaqi, Ibn ‘Adi and others. Ranked by hasan by al-Imam Ahmad).

Al-Quran and al-Sunnah are adjustable sources of Islam. However, there are two major problems concerning these two divine sources, first is that they are contaminated and second is that they are misinterpreted. Al-Quran is being contaminated by the irresponsible ones who add elements of Israiliyyat and mythical stories to it though its preservation is guaranteed by Allah. To the untrained eyes, those stories that are linked to the al-Quran are considered funny and impractical.

This blunder is commonly done by a significant number of religious speakers who frequently appear in electronic media in our country. Similarly, throughout the history, thousands of fabricated hadith were created to for the sake of various parties or due to lack of knowledge. In Malaysia, hadith is being quoted and narrated haphazardly by many individuals to the extent that even comical or garbled stories are linked to hadith. All these require tajdid.

Akidah is the core of Islam. The akidah of Islam is simple and comprehensible, as simple as the concept of akidah described in Surah al-Ikhlas. One who reads the al-Quran will find the intelligibility of akidah of Islam described in it, in Surah al-An’am for instance. The explanation is not convoluted like some syllabus used to teach people the attributes of Allah that goes something like Allah is existent and the opposite is non-existent, Allah is hearing and the opposite is deaf, Allah is seeing and the opposite is blind. Many of the muslims, new and old, are not clear about akidah and can easily ‘switch their religion’ despite having memorized this syllabus. This is because the syllabus was based on philosophical thoughts that is not as solid as the simple and comprehensible akidah described by al-Quran and al-Sunnah. We need tajdid in this area.

In applying fiqh, mazhab fanaticism that is being passed down to us by some religious conservative is causing us to become a society that is ‘color-blind’ on facts or completely lacking of curiosity not questioning what are the basis for the religious practices being performed. We fail to ask if the religious practice originates from al-Quran and al-Sunnah or is a mere presumption. Even those who are fanatic to mazhab Syafi’i are not sure if the opinions they are upholding are indeed the opinions of al-Imam al-Syafi’I (deceased in 204H) or are only words that come out of people’s mouth.

Even more worrying is the fact that our fiqh comprehension that is lacking of supporting evidence or built on weak evidence leads to narrow-mindedness and imposes inconvenience to the ummah. Unnecessarily arduous rules that are not based on clear nas are enforced such as the direction to ‘purify’ the whole house issued by some quarters. In addition to lacking of clear nas, it is unreasonably burdening. The need to have a fiqh comprehension that is based on strong supporting evidence and is undemanding is a requirement in this era. In a hadith, the Prophet s.a.w said:

“Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So you should not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded.” (Reported by al-Bukhari)

Tazkiah al-Nafs or spiritual refinement that is being referred to by some people as tasawwuf is essential to the soul. However, a matter as delicate as that involving the spiritual bond of a person with Allah requires the guidance of al-Quran and al-Sunnah. If not, one will wander off and enter a world that is filled with philosophical words, dreams of the afterworld, stories of saints and the supernatural and various other strange philosophies. It no longer leads them to Allah but instead, it leads them into the messy domain of weird Sufism causing them to abandon their study on al-Quran as well as hadith and concentrate only on what their ‘tok syeikh (chief) says’. In this matter, tajdid is required.

Humankind needs politics to survive in a communal life. Islam has the guideline for that. However, because we have become so habituated to the Western politics, sometimes we are even worse than them, politics no longer brings forth happiness and tranquility to the ummah but it instigates nuisance, anxiety and other unpleasant states of mind. The application of Islam in our politics is hardly noticeable even by those who are spotting the Islamic brand or the likes of it. In this matter, tajdid is required.

A lot of the contemporary issues we are encountering these days were not known in the past. To ensure a continuous survival of the ummah, various new opinions are required to cater for the change that the ummah and the world are experiencing. The opinions of preceding theologians may not be wrong but have expired due to the change in time and circumstances. Therefore, tajdid to those opinions or formulation of new opinions that are still centered upon al-Quran and al-Sunnah are required and a must. Some of the nas from al-Quran and al-Sunnah has to be viewed in a much broader context in terms of its meaning and substance.

Therefore, obviously, the endeavor and movement that advocates tajdid is necessary for the ummah including us in Malaysia. This is regardless of the fact that every now and then, tajdid advocates are criticized and subjected to various slanders by those who are bothered by tajdid. Regarding this phenomenon, the Prophet s.a.w once said:

“Indeed Islaam began as something strange. And it will return as something strange the way it began. So give glad tidings to the strangers” He was asked, “Who are the strangers O Allah’s Apostle?” He answered, “Those who are righteous when the people have become corrupt.” (Reported by Ahmad, sahih)

‘Unity government’ has become a hot term. I am not sure what it means exactly. Is it possible that it is just like before when ‘Islam Hadhari’ appeared out of nowhere and only much later did its definition was discovered? Whatever it is, as a Muslim, I will be extremely pleased and happy if Muslims can make amends with each other and together, look for ways to preserve the wellbeing of the ummah.

One who dislikes seeing Muslims reconciling with each other is like one who is possessed by satan because of a never-ending grudge or pointless fanaticism or unbounded prejudice. That sentiment is deemed as wicked unless he can prove that dispute among Muslims is more beneficial than harmony. Allah says (translated as):

“The believers are but a single brotherhood: so make peace and reconciliation between your two (contending) brothers; and fear Allah, that ye may receive mercy.” (Surah al-Hujurat: verse 10)

It used to be that the word ‘asabiyyah’ represents sectarian or racial fanaticism which always leads to squabble and fighting. These days, ‘asabiyyah’ manifests itself in a form of political party, association, jamaah and various other form of fraternity. Consequently, driven by the sectarian fanaticism, people are ceaselessly in dispute with each other. The Prophet s.a.w said:

“…One who fights under the banner of a people who ate blind (to the cause for which they are fighting. i. e. do not know whether their cause is just or otherwise), who gets flared up with family pride, calls, (people) to fight for their. family honour, and supports his kith and kin (i. e. fights not for the cause of Allah but for the sake of this family or tribe) -if he is killed (in this fight), he dies as one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya”. (Reported by Muslim)

In a narration whose sanad (chain of narrators) is weak but is supported by the previous hadith, the Prophet s.a.w said:

“Whoever calls for ‘asabiyyah, fights for the sake of ‘asabiyyah and dies because of ‘asabiyyah is not belonging to us.” (Reported by Abu Daud)

‘Asabiyyah disease is present not only in the form of Arab or Persian or Malay racism but it also manifests itself in the form of political parties that are established under the name of democracy these days. Principles and sanity evaporates into thin air only because of fanaticism for a certain political party or hatred towards the opposing party. It is to the extent that even those who supposedly fight for the cause of the Arabs or the Malays can link up with other people to subjugate their own race.

Similarly, those who claim that they are fighting for the cause of Islam are willing to work with the non-Muslims to go up against Muslims. Even more, some self-proclaimed ‘nationalists’ stoop to disgracing their own race only because of political disagreement. Likewise, some quarters who are supposedly Islamists are inclined to befriend a socialist capitalist, and even the anti Islamic state, but get aggravated when they are asked to make amends with Muslims. Political parties have molded a form of ‘asabiyyah that is upsetting and detrimental to Muslim brotherhood.

I truly hope that Muslims in this country will move away from thinking only about the interest of their party and instead, start thinking about the wellbeing of the ummah which is of much bigger importance than their party. The Prophet s.a.w praised al-Hasan bin ‘Ali because he performed a deed that caused the dispute between the supporters of Mu’awiyah r.a and the supporters of ‘Ali r.a to cease. Abu Bakra r.a said, “Once while the Prophet was addressing (the people), Al-Hasan (bin ‘Ali) came and the Prophet said, ‘This son of mine is a chief, and Allah may make peace between two groups of Muslims through him.” (Reported by al-Bukhari)

The prophecy in this hadith became a reality when Saiyyidina Hasan voluntarily relinquished the top government post and handed it over to Mu’awiyah after his father, Saiyyidina ‘Ali, passed away. Following that, Mu’awiyah took complete control of the government and Muslims labeled that year as ‘year of reconciliation’. (Ibn Kathir, Al-Ba`ith al-Hathith, pg. 177, Beirut: Dar al-Fikr). In addition to that, Mu’awiyah himself wanted the Muslims to benefit from harmony. He said, “Who will care for the Muslims (if their fathers are killed)?” (Reported by al-Bukhari.

In commenting this hadith, Ibn Taimiyyah stated: “The Prophet s.a.w praised al-Hassan for the reconciliation that he did and named him as sayyid meaning ‘chief’. This was because Allah and His Messenger liked and blessed his action. If the war that occurred among the Muslims was commanded by Allah and His Messenger, surely the Prophet would not praised the reconciliation done by al-Hassan. If war was commanded by Allah and His Messenger, by stopping it, it meant that al-Hassan had abandoned his duty or disregarded an act that Allah favored. This hadith is clear evidence that proves al-Hassan’s accomplishment was praiseworthy.” Ibn Taimiyyah, Al-Khilafah wa al-Mulk, pg. 84).

In Malaysia, we do not expect for the Muslim political parties to hand over their authority to each other. Yes, we need to have a strong balance of authority between the government and the opposition. Our hope is for them to be able to sit at the same table to discuss the wellbeing of the ummah especially on issues that are specific to the Muslims. Isn’t there any common point of interest between UMNO and PAS on specific issues? It is acceptable for us to have different opinions and even to argue but there has to be a common point of interest when it comes to issues that involve the wellbeing of the ummah and the nation. The line of thought must be established on the foundation of nas (religious texts) and ukhuwwah islamiyyah (Islamic brotherhood) while fanaticism that traps people in partisan confinement must be restrained. Islam is not just about politics. Islam also comprises of akidah (faith), akhlak (personal manner), economy, education and many more. In a critical time like this, doesn’t any one of them reserve a few of their precious breaths to spend it thinking about the wellbeing of the ummah on issues that are specific to us? If UMNO and PAS are able to sit with the groups that adopt different principles and different cause of struggle in an amicable and pleasant manner, isn’t there any room for them to sit together? We shall be concerned about what the Prophet s.a.w said:

“Allah hates the most a person who is obstinate when arguing” (Reported by al-Bukhari and Muslim)

That is the reason why, when I was having a long talk with Tun Abdullah in London two weeks ago, I suggested that UMNO and PAS sit together to discuss issues outside of the political theme. Try to learn to understand each other and do it for the sake of Allah and not for the sake of party.

They may have a bad record of reconciliation effort experienced in the past but time and generation has changed. What we have today is not the same as yesterday. Today, people are more mature whereas the situation is getting more critical. The discussion shall no longer start off with issues on power but it shall be centered upon the wellbeing of the ummah. Blessing will come if there is a genuine sincerity. Allah will reveal to us the path that leads to goodness. When an enemy of Islam wishes to reconcile, we are commanded to accept it. This command is even more applicable if the reconciliation is among Muslims.

Allah says (translated as):

“But if the enemy inclines towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah for He is one that heareth and knoweth (All things).” (Surah al-Anfal: verse 61)

Some people say that the reconciliation among the Muslim political parties will cause ‘others’ to be victimized. I am puzzled by that statement. Every time we have two groups sitting together for a discussion, does it always mean that other group will be victimized? If it is a Muslim making that statement, I think that he can be likened to the followers of Abdullah bin Saba who instigated the battle between ‘Ali and ‘Aishah. When they saw that ‘Ali and ‘Aishah was going to reconcile, they set off a surprise attack that dragged the Muslims to fight with each other.

Ibn Kathir (deceased in 774 H) stated that when those who were involved in ‘Uthman’s assassination, specifically the rebels, heard about ‘Ali’s decision to reconcile with ‘Aishah, they became worried. They discussed it among them and said, “They have reconciled at the price of our blood”. They meant that the reconciliation implied that weapons would be then be directed towards them. They continued discussing it until ‘Abdullah bin Saba suggested that they spark off a fight so that the battle would still occur. Before dawn, they attacked both the armies of ‘Aishah and ‘Ali simultaneously causing both sides to think that the other side had broken their promise. ‘Aishah’s army said, “’Ali’s army has attacked us!” whereas ‘Ali’s army said, “’Aishah’s army has attacked us!”. Thus, the Battle of Jamal took place and caused so many casualties among the Muslims. (al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah 7/249, Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah).

As stated by Winston Churchill: “History repeats itself because no one was listening the first time”.

I often call for Muslims to Islamize their politics and not politicize Islam. One may ask, what is the difference between the two? The difference is, when we strive to Islamize our politics we will ensure that our actions and our political missions do not contradict the teachings of Islam. Also, we will attempt to Islamize any un-Islamic political custom. In other words, we will use Islam as the guiding principle of our actions.

On the other hand, Islam is politicized when used as a political capital to secure power. In doing that, Islam is used not as a guiding principle but as a mere justification or ‘halal certificate’ to persuade the society or their followers to accept their actions.

Consequently, one will execute his political mission without referring it first to the teachings of Islam but when his action is questioned, he will manipulate the view or religious texts of Islam to defend himself. In short, Islamizing politics is done by designating Islam as the guiding principle whereas politicizing Islam is done by manipulating Islam in one’s favor using it as a tool or justification.

Therefore, when one assigns Islam as the foundation or guiding principle, he will willingly retract his opinion or apologize for his action if he discovers that it contradicts the teachings of Islam. As for the one who uses Islam as a justification or tool, he will make use of Islam to legalize his political action even though it is undoubtedly sinful.

He is not keen to listen to the concrete evidence or contention provided by syarak for him to apply but instead, he looks for a back-up from the religious authority that is willing to legalize his action even though he realizes that the opinion given to support him is weak and groundless. This is similar to the fanatical clusters and mazhab (school of thoughts) followers who hold on the views of their faction with no concern on strong reasoning and justifications.

Al-Imam Ibn Qayyim al-Jauziyyah (deceased in 751H) criticized the extremists in mazhab saying:

“Even more peculiar is your attitude o blind followers! When you find a Quranic verse that suits the opinion of your mazhab, you will accept its obvious meaning and hold on to it. Your basis in that sense is the opinion of your mazhab and not the Quranic verse itself. If you find another equivalent verse that contradicts the opinion of your mazhab, you will not accept it. You will try to make various interpretations of it and take it out of its clear context because it does not suit your mazhab. You are also treating the religious texts of al-Sunnah the same way. If you find a sahih (sound) hadith that suits the opinion of your mazhab, you will accept it. You will say, “We have the words from the Prophet s.a.w saying this and that.” However, if you find one hundred sahih hadith that differ from the view of your mazhab, you will not even give it a glance.” (Ibn Qayyim al-Jauziyyah, I’lam al-Muwaqqi’in, 2/195, Beirut: Dar al-Fikr).

More often than not, the endeavor or the inclination to either Islamize politics or politicize Islam is not necessarily tied to the code of a political party or a faction but it is more of a personal attitude. However, if the attitude develops into a mainstream practice in a political party or faction, it represents their actual inclination. These days, it is not easy to hold on to and persevere with the principles of Islam in tackling politics.

Nevertheless, this is a fact that each one of us needs to be conscious of. In the history of Prophet Musa a.s versus the Pharaoh, the Pharaoh even had brought up the misconduct done by Prophet Musa a.s specifically when Musa a.s beat an Egyptian man before fleeing to Madyan. Allah narrated this story in the Quran by saying (translated as):

“So go forth, both of you, to Pharaoh, and say: ‘We have been sent by the Lord and Cherisher of the worlds; “‘Send thou with us the Children of Israel.’” (Pharaoh) said: “Did we not cherish thee as a child among us, and didst thou not stay in our midst many years of thy life? And thou didst a deed of thine which (thou knowest) thou didst, and thou art an ungrateful (wretch)!” Moses said: “I did it then, when I was in error. So I fled from you (all) when I feared you; but my Lord has (since) invested me with judgment (and wisdom) and appointed me as one of the Apostles. “And this is the favor with which thou dost reproach me,- that thou hast enslaved the Children of Israel!” (Surah al-Syu’ara: 16-22)

This is one of the main reasons Allah sent to us His Apostles, to educate us on the matter of principle. Even when he was in the middle of a critical situation, Prophet Musa a.s still admitted that it was wrong for him to hit the Egyptian and that his action was uncalled-for. Prophet Musa a.s did not try to legalize his deed to safeguard his interest, never! Two wrongs do not make a right.

Prophet Musa a.s had to deal with the leading political power in his time and even in the history of human civilization. His struggle was much greater than any struggle that is ever attempted in our time. Be that as it may, he still persevered with his principles. His action reflected the need for humankind to adhere to the divine revelation instead of manipulating the divine revelation to meet the human desire.

In our political environment, it is rare to see an individual admitting the mistake that he or his party has done. Instead, he will look for various justifications to defend himself or his faction even though he is fully aware that the action is wrong. Some are willing to forfeit their principle to avoid having their seat or position forfeited. The outcome of that is as what we’re witnessing now. We are seeing the birth of a culture, mostly involving blasphemy and derision, that sometimes transgresses the boundary of sanity and does not measure up to a civilized discourse.

Islam does not put too much restriction on politics since it is a vast subject that involves the wellbeing of the ummah and the nation. Politics is not a thing of a pastime like playing golf or football. To engage in politics means to stake the wellbeing of humankind. Therefore, all political actions must be executed to bring forth benefits to the ummah and the people, not for the benefit of oneself or one’s party.

Subsequently, we have to bear in mind that not everyone who participates in the holy battlefield will enter Paradise. Though at times the deed is beneficial to the Muslim society, the individual performing the deed may not receive any reward from Allah if his intention or his approach, or both, is wrong even if his struggle is proclaimed to be under the banner of Islam. Moreover, there is a hadith that relates the story of an individual who seemed to have fought bravely in the battle but would become the dweller of Hell.

Abu Huraira r.a narrated:

“We were in the company of Allah’s Apostle in a Ghazwa (battle), and he remarked about a man who claimed to be a Muslim, saying, “This (man) is from the people of the (Hell) Fire.” When the battle started, the man fought violently till he got wounded. Somebody said, “O Allah’s Apostle! The man whom you described as being from the people of the (Hell) Fire fought violently today and died.” The Prophet said, “He will go to the (Hell) Fire.” Some people were on the point of doubting (the truth of what the Prophet had said) and while they were in this state, suddenly someone said that he was still alive but severely wounded. When night fell, he lost patience and committed suicide. The Prophet was informed of that, and he said, “Allah is Greater! I testify that I am Allah’s Slave and His Apostle.” Then he ordered Bilal to announce amongst the people: ‘None will enter Paradise but a Muslim, and Allah may support this religion (i.e. Islam) even with a disobedient man.’”

In our community, religion truly is the pull factor for many people. Therefore, every person who wishes to struggle for the religion or wishes to focus his talks and actions on the religion has to ask himself whether he really yearns for the religion or yearns for power. After he straighten out his intention, he must then ensure that his actions are aligned with Islam’s requirement and not interpret Islam in such a way that it gives the impression as if Islam’s requirement is aligned with his actions. Thus, Islamize our politics and do not politicize our Islam.