Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted on Dec 28, 2019

Q&A – Popular Movements in Iraq, Lebanon and Iran (Translated)

Q&A – Popular Movements in Iraq, Lebanon and Iran (Translated)


بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم


Answer to Question
Popular Movements in Iraq, Lebanon and Iran


We know that popular movements in Iraq, Lebanon and Iran began spontaneously as outlined on 5/11/2019; are they still so? Are there any European roles in these three countries where America is influential? Will the situation in these three countries remain the same, or is America in the process of changing these agents or some of them by a normal change or through the military as it did in Egypt and Sudan? May Allah reward you.


In order to clarify the answer to the above questions, we will review to some extent the following:

First: The causes and motives of the protests:

Yes, the protests started spontaneously in the three countries, and their motives were briefly as follows:

1-  Protests in Iraq: Protests broke out in Iraq in early October 2019 in the form of demonstrations and sit-ins that developed into the closure of bridges in Baghdad and other major roads in protest against the deterioration of the economic situation of the country, the spread of administrative and financial corruption in government agencies and against the widespread unemployment. And the protests started spontaneously after they became too distressing and the people’s livelihoods were confined. The regime was unable to solve the electricity issue through the 16 years of the regime’s span, nor  provide job opportunities for young people and graduates, nor satisfy people’s hunger despite the huge oil resources. The protests then exploded with nearly 350 people killed, in addition to thousands wounded and detained. The offices of pro-Iranian government parties were burnt, then setting fire to the vicinity of the Iranian consulate in Karbala on 4/11/2019, throwing stones at them, demanding their removal from the city, and burning of the Iranian consulate in Najaf on 27/11/2019. What made the Iraqi government more shaky and stunned is that these protests have pervaded the cities of Baghdad, Nasiriyah, Karbala, Najaf and other cities of the south; those areas which were considered by the regime as areas of popular weight. Its impact were so severe that Abdul Mahdi was unable to continue to cling to the rule, thus he resigned on 30/11/2019 and the parliament approved the resignation on 1/12/2019.

2-  Lebanon’s Protests: The economic situation in Lebanon has reached the brink of complete collapse or almost did! “Lebanon’s public debt at the beginning of 2019 was 85.32 billion dollars” (Al-Arabi Al-Jadeed, 15/3/2019), and this is a large debt that the usury on it consumes about half of the state revenues in Lebanon. “The country’s debt-to-GDP ratio is 1.52 percent, and the interest on debt uses almost half of the state’s revenues” (BBC 28/10/2019), and these capital crimes have left “a high rate of unemployment in Lebanon estimated at 37 percent for those under 35 years old…” (BBC 26/11/2019). In the face of this economic devastation brought on to the people by the political class, the spark of a WhatsApp Tax on 17/10/2019 ignited the streets in Lebanon, set fire to the offices of deputies especially in southern Lebanon and enraged Beirut, Nabatieh and Tyre, so massive demonstrations came out. And then it quickly turned to demanding the resignation of the government, and even the change of the entire political elite in Lebanon. And with the security mentality from which the state and its followers in Lebanon draw, the supporters of the Iran Party tried to intimidate the demonstrators on 24 and 25/10/2019 by storming the squares, and then repeated by the supporters of the Iran Party and the Amal Movement in Beirut!

3-  The Iranian Protests: The Iranian regime was no better than its pivotal states – Iraq, Lebanon and Syria before them- as it lacks a pastoral view of governing the country, which has led the Revolutionary Guard to control large sectors of the Iranian economy and marginalize the non-Persian regions on the periphery, creating a belt of cities of misery on the outskirts of the state, and an economic situation on the verge of explosion in the center and the peripheries alike, and it was shameful for the regime that boasts of the nuclear program and missiles that popular protests explode due to lack of gasoline! This shortage is due to the lack of refineries, an uncomplicated industry for countries that take care of their people properly. Then, despite the nearly 40% increase in gasoline consumption in Iran since 2017 and the failure to operate a refinery in Hormuzjan province, much of the gasoline is smuggled abroad because of the price difference by gangs that are not difficult for the state to know, which is another manifestation of the state’s failure to manage one of the most vital resources “oil”! The state then raised the price of gasoline by 300%, and the protests broke out on 15/11/2019 in Tehran and dozens of other Iranian cities. The protests intensified, where banks were set on fire, Iranian estates, security and government offices were attacked, and the government cut off the Internet to prevent the communication among the protesters. The regime resorted to the highest level of violence in dealing with this protest movement and suppressing it with iron and fire. “As the Iranian security forces continue their crackdowns on protesters, the Iranian opposition, on 23rd November that the death toll of the protests exceeded 300 people, it documented the names of 99 of them, and that more than 4,000 people were injured, and more than 10,000 people were detained, and it indicated that the Revolutionary Guards pulled dead bodies from hospitals to an unknown destination” (Arabic Independent 24/11/2019).

Second: Are the protests still spontaneous without European intervention?

Europe has tried to take advantage of the protests, but it has not been effective or influential in penetrating American influence in the three countries. The clarification is the following:

1-  Europe’s attempts in Iraq: As we mentioned earlier, protests in Iraq, especially the southern regions, were escalating, concentrated in the Shiite regions, and it is not excluded that Europe, especially Britain, has tried to exploit these protests, and although there has been no credible evidence of British interference in the protests, Iran was cautious about this matter, and is even obsessed with it to the extent that Tehran’s Friday preacher, Muhammad Ali Mouhadi Karma, said during the sermon, describing the Iraqi demonstrators as “English Shiites”, adding “Some deviant groups that we describe as Shiites of the English crept into the ranks of the Iraqi people…” (Iran International 11/11/2019). His statement was that Iranian officials feared that Britain would take advantage of people’s movements, in addition to Iran trying to threaten protesters by accusing them of being agents for the British, especially since Britain’s position was almost explicit in supporting the protests “the British embassy said on its official Twitter page, that “Peaceful demonstrations are a right of the Iraqi people.” He added: “Violence against demonstrators is unacceptable” … “Our prayers for the wounded and the families of those who lost their lives in the demonstrations.” (Russian agency Sputnik 5/11/2019), which is the same position that had been expressed by British Secretary of State Andrew Morrison as quoted by Al Ain News website on 10/27/2019.

2-  Europe’s attempts in Lebanon: It is known that the followers of America and Europe roam and wander about in Lebanon, and it is also known that America’s followers, whether directly like Aoun and Berri or indirectly like Hezbollah through Iran, these are physically the stronger party… As for the followers of Europe “Britain and France” they are the weaker party, such as Geagea and Jumblatt… As for Hariri, he is the most vulnerable because he puts a foot in Europe and another in the pro-American Saudi Arabia, and these followers cannot resolve the decision, but rather do things that confuse the other side. For example, the ministers of the four Lebanese forces on 19/10/2019 resigned from the government which the protesters demand to bring it down, and Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced on 18/10/2019 a deadline of 72 hours to deal with the crisis, then he submitted his resignation on 29/10/2019 against the wishes of the head of the state and the wishes of Iran’s security-dominant party in Lebanon. Then France sent its envoy to Lebanon the director of The Middle East and North Africa Department at the French Foreign Ministry, Christophe Farno, “to whom – to President Aoun – he conveyed a message from the French President, Emmanuel Macron, and the French government confirming France’s interest in the situation in Lebanon and its willingness to assist Lebanon in the current circumstances” (Al-Arabia 11/11/2019). The envoy’s visit was not accepted by the followers of America, as the National Agency for Official Information quoted Foreign Minister Basil that he told the French envoy: “No external party should enter the line of the Lebanese crisis and exploit it”… Britain also sent its envoy, Richard Moore, who met with Aoun and said: “The United Kingdom has always been an important partner and supporter for Lebanon for a long time, for example, investing $200 million last year to support Lebanon’s security, stability, prosperity, and sovereignty.” He continued, “It is important to continue to respect the right to peaceful protest, and any repression of the protest movement by violence or intimidation by anyone is totally unacceptable.” (Arabic Independent 25/11/2019).

3-  European attempts in Iran: The Iranian regime, as usual, was claiming that it was responding to external conspiracies and threats. “Today, the head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards threatened to destroy America, Israel, Britain, and Saudi Arabia, should they cross the “red lines” in dealing with his country. Salami said, in a speech given to pro-government demonstrators in Tehran and broadcast by Iranian television: “I say to America, Israel, the Saud family and Britain you have experienced our power in the battlefield and you could not respond; the world has come to observe some of our slaps.” He continued: “We say to you: Do not cross our lines, but if you cross the red lines, we will destroy you” (RT 25/11/2019). The regime wants to give the impression that external forces are behind the protests and are not from the people who tasted the bitterness. Note that all indications show that people’s protests are from their hearts and blood! But it seems that the tone of external interference persists in the Iranian regime to the extent thatTehran’s Friday preacher, as we mentioned earlier, accused the Shiites protesting in Iraq of being English Shiites! The protests in Iran are not the first, nor will they be the last, and they are probably spontaneous, and there are no signs that indicate international hands. The protests in Iran, like Syria, are a people fighting against the tyrant rulers whose policies has not known the taste of success in taking care of the affairs of the Ummah.

Third: As for America changing its agents in the three countries, the matter is as follows:

1-  The actual influence in these three countries is the American influence, while Europe (Britain and France) has not succeeded in sharing this influence with America.

2-  Until the Ummah rises up to a correct uprising on the basis of Islam and then the correct change takes place, until that happens, the rulers of these three countries will continue to be subject to American policy to change or keep them.

3-  The colonial Kaffir states want the agent to serve their interests. If the people revolted and there was turmoil in his reign, then they will give him a specified period; if he cannot arrange his order in the ruling, then he becomes unable to serve his master, so he changes him. The tool for this is the lie of the so-called democracy by bringing a new agent with a less black face than the expelled agent; that is, if the crisis is not intractable, otherwise the tool is the “military” as it has done in Egypt 2011 or Sudan 20019.

Fourth: Reviewing the expected change in the three countries in the light of current realities, the following is evident:

1-  With regard to Iran: America declares openly that it does not want to change the regime in Iran; that is, no matter how much the killing in the protests, America believes that this regime serves its interests! At a time when the blood of Muslims in Iran was shed by the regime, American officials were insisting on maintaining order “a senior official at the White House said Sunday that his country does not want to change the regime in Iran…” (Al Arabiya Net Sunday, 11/17/2019);


therefore, no change is expected in the Iranian regime due to the protests of 11/2019 just as there was no change due to last year’s protests.

2-  With regard to Lebanon: As we mentioned, Lebanon has America’s followers and Europe’s followers, and the first team is the strongest and this facilitates the concession of the weakest according to the method of compromise, and the two sides are different over a techno-political government or technocrat government! After all, it is expected that America will change the balance of government in Lebanon, so that the weight will be for America’s followers and engage with them followers of Europe but to a certain extent, then engage the street to calm it down.

3-  With regard to Iraq: America governs Iraq almost directly from behind a curtain. Its embassy in Baghdad has 16,000 employees, who follow the work of all Iraqi ministries, especially the oil and  security sector, and it is the largest embassy for America in the world. It has many military bases in Iraq, the most famous of which is the Ain al-Assad base in Anbar. In the last week of last month, America intensified its delegations, so the sudden visit of US Vice President Pence on 23/11/2019 to the base of Ain al-Assad, and before a week passed the visit of of the U.S. Vice President to Iraq, America sent the commander of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the U.S. Army Mark Milley to Baghdad on 27/11/2019. This is evidence of the relentless American follow-up, especially that Iraq is a sensitive case to America; it occupied it and claimed that it takes its hand to progress but it took it to turmoil and rupture, and now it is in successive crises and it is to be expected that if the conditions do not calm soon America will bring about change through “the military” and engage the street with them in governing as it did in Egypt or Sudan. It has been observed that the Anti-Terrorist apparatus in Iraq, which is a large military force formed by the Americans and equipped with the best military equipment; this apparatus is far from the policy of repression of the protests, and it appears that the protesters in Tahrir Square view this force as their savior from the corrupt politicians, as they raise a big picture of General Abdel-Wahab Al-Saadi, one of the leaders of the agency after his dismissal by Abdel-Mahdi, as if this force is acceptable to the demonstrators to have a role in arranging the solution. This is on the one hand, while on the other hand, the military meetings held by America in Baghdad, and the dispatch of its envoys for that in addition to the activity of its large embassy in Baghdad, all of this are arrangements that America prepares when necessary.

This is not affected by the resignation of Abdel-Mahdi and the appointment of a new president, as this does not solve the problem, but rather is temporary, meaning that the wound remains open until it heals!

However, the mass movement in the three countries has points counted for it and other points against it. As for what counts for it is that its movement is spontaneous, and it is still mostly so. As for what counts against it is that it has not yet taken a sincere leadership to Allah Subhanahu, and sincere to His Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, to enlighten his path to the rule of Islam, the true Khilafah Rashidah (rightly guided Caliphate). And if the movement continues without sincere leadership and thus proceeds without guidance, then its efforts and sacrifices will be lost in vain, and the movement will then be like the one who untwisted her spun thread after it was strong! Allah is the guide to the sound way.

7th Rabii’ II 1441 AH

04/12/2019 CE

Read More

Posted on Dec 28, 2019

Q&A – Is it Permissible to Buy a House Before it is Built under the Sale of Salam or Istisna’a (Manufacturing)?

Q&A – Is it Permissible to Buy a House Before it is Built under the Sale of Salam or Istisna’a (Manufacturing)?


This question and answer piece was published on Hizb Ut-Tahrir’s Central Media office’s website in the Q&A section. Refer to original link below.

Yuce Ulfa’s Question:

Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh:

Our honourable Sheikh, may Allah protect you and aid you with His victory.

I have a question: is it permissible to sell the house by Istisna’a contract? For example, a man has a land and sells the house that will be built in his land by the Istisna’ contract. This house is accurately described in terms of its area, number of rooms, building materials etc., and this house will be delivered after a certain agreed period, and the price will either be given all in advance at the time of the contract, or some of it in advance as a deposit and some as postponed payment, or will be given all as postponed payment. Is this transaction permissible?

Jazak Allah Khair, Wa Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh

Hafid Munasir’s Question:

Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh

Our honourable Sheikh, I need an explanation on Istisna’. Is it a kind of sale? Is it permissible for us to contract someone to build (Istisna’) a house on a land owned by the manufacturer provided that we buy that land together?

Jazak Allah Khair in abundance

Assalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh

Faraz Muhammad Fateh’s Question:

Assalam Alaikum Our Amir

I hope you are fine and in good condition.

I wanted to know about a query which is very much related to the case you have recently answered in below link:

Well if someone goes into an agreement of buying a car or land on installment basis, so what is the hukm if he is given the possession after completion of payment only or in some cases if the possession is given just after signing the contract whilst the payment continues.

Considering the above condition another issue is that: if someone wants to sell off his car or land during middle of his payment schedule and then the third person completes the remaining payment, then what is the Shari’ Hukim of selling in such cases?

Jazak Allah Khair.

Your Brother. Faraz



Wa Alaikum Assalam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuh

Your questions are similar, some of you asked about buying a house before it is built by Salam selling (forward sale / advance sale). Some of you asked about selling the house before you build it by Istisna’ (manufacturing / an order for a specially made item). We have previously answered a question related to the subject that buying a house before it is built, regardless of the extensive description, does not fall under Salam or Istisna’. Here’s the explanation:

First: the sale of something that does not belong to the seller is not pemissible. There are many Hadiths on this subject:

At-Tirmithi narrated in his Sunnan from Hakim ibn Hizam, he said:

“أَتَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقُلْتُ: يَأْتِينِي الرَّجُلُ يَسْأَلُنِي مِنَ البَيْعِ مَا لَيْسَ عِنْدِي، أَبْتَاعُ لَهُ مِنَ السُّوقِ، ثُمَّ أَبِيعُهُ؟ قَالَ: «لَا تَبِعْ مَا لَيْسَ عِنْدَكَ»

“I came to the Prophet and asked (the Prophet): Messenger of Allah, a man comes to me and wants me to sell him something which is not in my possession. Should I buy it for him from the market? He replied: ‘Do not sell what you do not possess.’”

At-Tirmithi narrated from Abdullah Ibn Amr that the Prophet (saw) said:

«لَا يَحِلُّ سَلَفٌ وَبَيْعٌ، وَلَا شَرْطَانِ فِي بَيْعٍ، وَلَا رِبْحُ مَا لَمْ يُضْمَنْ، وَلَا بَيْعُ مَا لَيْسَ عِنْدَكَ»

“The provision of a loan combined with a sale is not allowable, nor two conditions relating to one transaction, nor profit arising from something which is not in one’s charge, nor selling what is not in your possession”.

Therefore, it is not permissible to sell a house or an apartment that is not built because it is not owned, let alone it is non-existent and not built. That is, selling the apartment that is not being built is not permissible because what is up for sale, the apartment, is non-existent. For the validity of the sale the apartment has to exist in a way that refers to it by its structure: foundations, columns, ceilings and so on, which is sufficient as a custom to describe the apartment and that it is built and ready to be handed over.

Secondly, there is an exception that is mentioned in Shariah text that allows the sale of what is not owned in two cases: Salam, and Istisna’, which does not apply to non-built apartments, as shown below:

First: Salam sale:

1. The sale of Salam is: “what the seller undertakes to supply some specified goods to the buyer at a future date in exchange of an advanced price. That is, the purchase of a commodity for deferred delivery in exchange for immediate payment.

This sale is permissible according to Islam and this sale is in what is measured, weighed and counted, as shown in the book, The Islamic Personality Vol II, where it says:

(The permissibility of Salam sale is proven by the Sunnah; on the authority of Ibn Abbas, he said:

«قَدِمَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم الْمَدِينَةَ وَهُمْ يُسْلِفُونَ فِي الثِّمَارِ السَّنَةَ وَالسَّنَتَيْنِ فَقَالَ: مَنْ أَسْلَفَ فِي تَمْرٍ فَلْيُسْلِفْ فِي كَيْلٍ مَعْلُومٍ وَوَزْنٍ مَعْلُومٍ إِلَى أَجَلٍ مَعْلُومٍ»

When the Messenger of Allah () came to Medina, they were paying one, two and three years in advance for fruits, so he said: Those who pay in advance for anything, must do for a specified measure and weight with a specified time fixed.” [Muslim]

From `Abdur Rahman bin Abza and `Abdullah bin Abi `Aufa, they said:

«كُنَّا نُصِيبُ الْمَغَانِمَ مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِصلى الله عليه وسلمفَكَانَ يَأْتِينَا أَنْبَاطٌ مِنْ أَنْبَاطِ الشَّأْمِ فَنُسْلِفُهُمْ فِي الْحِنْطَةِ وَالشَّعِيرِ وَالزَّبِيبِ إِلَى أَجَلٍ مُسَمَّى، قَالَ: قُلْتُ أَكَانَ لَهُمْ زَرْعٌ أَوْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُمْ زَرْعٌ؟ قَالَا: مَا كُنَّا نَسْأَلُهُمْ عَنْ ذَلِكَ»

“We used to get war booty while we were with Allah’s Messenger () and when the peasants of Sham came to us we used to pay them in advance for wheat, barley, and oil to be delivered within a fixed period.” I asked them, “Did the peasants own standing crops or not?” They replied, “We never asked them about it.” [Bukhari]

And in a different version:

 «إِنَّا كُنَّا نُسْلِفُ عَلَى عَهْدِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَأَبِي بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ فِي الْحِنْطَةِ وَالشَّعِيرِ وَالزَّبِيبِ وَالتَّمْرِ إِلَى قَوْمٍ مَا هُوَ عِنْدَهُمْ»رواه أبو داود.

“We used to pay in advance (salaf) during the time of the Messenger of Allah (), Abu Bakr and ‘Umar in wheat, barley, dates and raisins. to those people who did not possess these things.” [Abu Dawud]

These Hadiths are all clear evidence of the permissibility of Salam sale. As for what are the things in which Salam sale is permissible, and what are things in which Salam sale is not permissible, they are clear from the Hadith and the consences. Salam is the sale of what is not possessed, and the sale of what is not founded, which are forbidden. The Salam has been excluded from them in the text and the prohibition specified in others. It is therefore imperative that the things permitted in Salam sale are stipulated. By reference to the texts, we find that the Salam sale is permissible in all that is measured and weighed as it is permissible in every thngs counted (number).

The permisibility of the Salam sale for the measured and weighed is proven by the Hadith of Ibn Abbas, he said:

«قَدِمَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم الْمَدِينَةَ وَهُمْ يُسْلِمُونَ فِي التَّمْرِ السَّنَتَيْنِ وَالثَّلَاثَ، فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم: مَنْ أَسْلَفَ فَلْيُسْلِفْ فِي ثَمَنٍ مَعْلُومٍ، وَوَزْنٍ مَعْلُومٍ إِلَى أَجَلٍ مَعْلُومٍ»

When the Messenger of Allah () came to Medina, they were paying one, two and three years in advance for fruits, so he said: Those who pay in advance for anything, must do for a specified measure and weight with a specified time fixed.”

(Bidayat Al- Mujtahid Wa Nihayat Al-Muqtasid by Ibn Rushd Al-Hafeed”. In another narration of Ibn Abbas, he said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

«مَنْ أَسْلَفَ فِي شَيْءٍ فَفِي كَيْلٍ مَعْلُومٍ وَوَزْنٍ مَعْلُومٍ إِلَى أَجَلٍ مَعْلُومٍ».

“Those who pay in advance for anything, must do for a specified measure and weight with a specified time fixed.” [Bukhari]

This indicates that the money delivered will be from the measured and weighed things. As for the permissibility of what is counted, there was a consensus that Salam sals in food is permissible,

This consenses is reported by Ibn Al-Munthir. Bukhari narrated, he said Shu’ba told us: Muhammad or Abdullah Ibn Abi Al-Majalid told me, he said:

«اخْتَلَفَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ شَدَّادِ بْنِ الْهَادِ وَأَبُو بُرْدَةَ فِي السَّلَفِ فَبَعَثُونِي إِلَى ابْنِ أَبِي أَوْفَى رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ فَسَأَلْتُهُ فَقَالَ: إِنَّا كُنَّا نُسْلِفُ عَلَى عَهْدِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَأَبِي بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ فِي الْحِنْطَةِ وَالشَّعِيرِ وَالزَّبِيبِ وَالتَّمْرِ».

“’Abd Allah b. Shaddad and Abu Burdah disputed over salaf (payment in advance). They sent me to Ibn Abi Awfa and I asked him (about it) and he replied: We used to pay in advance (salaf) during the time of the Messenger of Allah (), Abu Bakr and ‘Umar in wheat, barley, dates and raisins.”

This indicates that Salam sale in food is permissible. And food is always either measured, weighed or counted. The attachment of the ruling on all estimated food, measured, weighed or counted is like the attachment of holding on to it, because it is from the things that need to be held, like the attachement of riba of fadhl (increase) to it, in terms of the increase in the measure, weight or number is riba. The Salam is also attached to it from being measured, weighed, and counted. The Hadith has a text permiting what is measured and weighed but did not mention the numbered. The consensus of the permissibilty of Salam sale in food makes the number included in Salam sale. However, things to be sold by Salam must be accurate in description like: Hourani wheat, Bereni dates, Egyptian cotton, Indian silk, and Turkish figs, and must be accurate in measure or weight as the weight of Ash-Sham, and Iraqi pound, and kilogrammes and liters. That is, it is necessary that the measure and weight are known and described.) End of what is stated in the book the Islamic Personality Part II.

Therefore, Salam sale is permitted in what is measured, weighted and numbered only.

2 – As to know how to measure and weigh and count is by recognising of the reality of funds that they are Mithly (measured, weighed etc.) money and Qaimi (value) funds:

Mithly money are those sold and bought by measure, weight or number, i.e., sold in the market wth th saa’ measure or by weight in Kilograms for example, or counted like apples, oranges or watermelons. These are allowed to be sold by Salam, as explained above in the book, the Islamic Personality. Also in Rawdhat At-Talibeen by Nawawi, under the title “Wa Fi Dhabt Al-Mithly Awjuh” Part 5 page 18 and 19, in which Nawawi mentions five aspects to regulate theMithly (fund), and said at the end ( the second method is correct, but it is better to say: the Mithly is what is limited by measure or weight, and Salam sale is permittd for it ) end

The Qaimi value money is money that is not bought or sold in measure, weight and number, such as the house, but each house is sold according to its location and the quality of its construction and proximity to the markets or beyond… etc. Therefore, the houses can not be sold by Salam because they are not measurred weighed and counted; they are not Mithly money that can be sold by Salam.

Therefore, the sale of an unbuilt house is not included in the Salam sale and its evidence does not apply to it. This is why the Hadiths of selling what you don’t own still applies to it.

Second: Manufacturing (Istisna’)

[Istisna’a (Manufacturing) in the Language: is a masdar (source) Astana’ (to ask for the manufacturing) of a thing. It is said: So and so Astana’ a door, if a man asked someone to make him a door, as it is said: Iktatab, i.e. he ordered someone to write to him. (Lisan Al-Arab, As-Sihah and Taj Al-A’roos, subject” Sana’). That is the request to manufacture, the person wants something to be manufactured (Mustasni’) goes to the manufacturer to make a specific thing and agree with him on the price and how to pay before the manufacturer starts making the manufacture. This sale is excluded from the sale of what you do not have and the evidence of this is what the Economic System Book stated about Istisna’a (Manufacturing):

(Manufacturing is where a person requests another to manufacture for him a vessel, a car or anything that is included in industry. Contracting manufacturing is allowed and proved in the Sunnah. The Messenger of Allah (saw) requested the manufacture of a seal (the ring used for a seal or a stamp). Anas said:

«صَنَعَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم خَاتَماً»

“the Messenger of Allah (saw) manufactured a ring”. Bukhari reported from Ibn Masoud who said:

«أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم اصْطَنَعَ خَاتَماً مِنْ ذَهَبٍ»

“the Messenger of Allah (saw) manufactured a ring of gold”. The Messenger of Allah (saw) also requested the manufacture of the minbar (pulpit). Bukhari reported that Sahl said that the Messenger of Allah (saw) sent to a woman to and said:

«بَعَثَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم إِلَى امْرَأَةٍ أَنْ مُرِي غُلَامَكِ النَّجَّارَ يَعْمَلُ لِي أَعْوَاداً أَجْلِسُ عَلَيْهِنَّ».

“Order your servant, the carpenter, to make me some board to sit on.”

“People used to manufacture at the time of the Messenger of Allah (saw), and he kept silent about this,” so his silence and action is his (saw) approval regarding manufacturing. The agreement and the action of the Messenger of Allah (saw) are divine evidences like his sayings. The matter contracted for manufacturing is the manufactured thing such as the seal, pulpit, cupboard, car and the like. From this angle, manufacturing is a form of selling not hiring. However, if someone were to bring the raw material to the manufacturer and ask him to manufacture a particular thing, then this would be a form of hiring. Industry, by itself, is an important pillar of the economic life in any nation and to any people in any society. Industry drive, in the past, was limited to the manual labour alone. When man started using steam to move machines, mechanical factories started to gradually replace the manual ones. When the new inventions came about a great revolution in industry occurred, thus production increased beyond expectation, and the mechanised factory became one of the pillars of economic life.

Rules pertaining to the mechanised and manual factories are rules of partnership, hiring, selling and foreign trade. With regard to establishing the factory, it could be by an individual property, which happens rarely, but is more generally by the property of many individuals who share in establishing it. Therefore, the rules of Islamic companies apply upon it. However, with respect to the work in the factory whether in management, manufacturing or other than these, the rules of hiring apply to it. With regard to the distribution of its production, the rules of selling and foreign trade apply to it. In this way, cheating, fraud and monopoly are prevented, as is the fixing of prices, as well as the other rules of selling. With regard to making orders for the production of the factory, whether little or great, before it is made, the rules of manufacturing apply to it. Shari’ has to be consulted regarding whether the client is obliged or not of what was manufactured for him) End.

The Fuqaha’ differed on Istisna’a (Manufacturing), some of them focused on the materials of industry to be used in industry according to manufacturing experts, and did not focus on the material manufactured whether they are Mithly, or of a value, Qaimi i.e. whether it is a shield or a tank, or a wardrobe or a car, and thus the Shariah rule is focused on materials of manufacturing that must be known to industry experts that these materials are from manufacturing materials, and therefore Istisna’ is not included in the chapter of Salam (advanced payment), but it is a special kind of sales contracted before the existence of the manufactured product.

This is the saying on Istisna’ (that it is not Salam) by: the Hanbalis and Hanafis with some disagreement:

– The Hanbalis, say that Istisna’: is the sale of a commodity that the person does not have, but unlike the Salam. All of this according to them comes back to selling and its conditions when talking about selling by craftsmanship. (Kashaf Al-Qina’ 3/132 T Ansar al-Sunna Al-Muhammadiyah).

– As for Hanafi’s, there is a difference in opinion; some of them do not classify it under Salam but as Istisna’: (… If one person says to another person of the people of Sana’i (craftsmanship): Make me this thing for such Dirhams, and if the manufacturer accepts, then this contract of Istisna’ is concluded according to Hanafi. (Al-Mabsoot by Surkhasii 12 / 138 T happiness),

Some of them consider it as Salam with the difference in term (Istsna’ is consistent with Salam significantly, what is described in the Zhimma is the Salam’s term, what confirms this is that the Hanafis made the subject of Istisna’a within the subject of Salam. This is also done by Malikis and Shafi’is, but the Salam is general for what is manufactured and others. Istisna is specific to what was required in manufacture, and Salam requires speed (in payment) of the price, while speed of paying Istisna’ – according to many Hanafis – is not a condition… [Fath Al-Qadeer 5/355, and Al-Bada’i 6/2677, and Al-Mabsoot 12/138 and others.]

– The Malikis and Shafi’is: made it part of Salam, so it takes its definition and provisions from Salam, when talking about paying in advance (Salaf) for something manufactured given to others. [Rawdat At-Talibeen 4/26 and those after it (Al-Maktab Al-Islami, and Al- Muhazab 1 / 297-298 Issa Al-Halabi edition).

It is clear from the above answer that Istisna’, whether its ruling is focused on industrial or manufactured materials, it does not apply to buildings, because the linguistic and customary truth of the word industry does not apply to buildings.

Therefore, the buildings remain before they are built, indicating their existence, such as if their foundations, pillars, or ceilings were not built.

The prohibition ruling of selling what you don’t have applies here on these buildings; therefore, the sale’s contract of such buildings are prohibited in Shariah.

This is what I outweigh and Allah Knows Best, He is Most Wise.

Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
5 Rabii’ Al-Akhar 1441 AH
2/12/2019 CE
The link to the answer from the Ameer’s Facebook page
Read More

Posted on Dec 12, 2019

Q&A – How to Understand the Hadith “Nothing turns back the Divine Fate (qadaa’) except supplication”

Q&A – How to Understand the Hadith “Nothing turns back the Divine Fate (qadaa’) except supplication”

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Answer to Question
How to Understand the Hadith
«لا يَرُدُّ الْقَضَاءَ إِلا الدُّعَاءُ»
“Nothing turns back the Divine Fate (qadaa’) except supplication”


In the book At-Tafkeer Al-Islami, which is one of the adopted books, it mentions that supplication (du’aa) does not turn back the Divine Destiny (qadar) and does not change the Divine fate (qadaa’) or the knowledge of Allah (swt)). However there are texts from the Qur’an and the Sunnah that seem to me to contradict this understanding; it has been narrated that the Prophet (saw) said:

«لَا يَرُدُّ الْقَضَاءَ إِلَّا الدُّعَاءُ»

“Nothing turns back the Divine Fate (qada) except supplication.”

There are other numerous Hadiths with this meaning, and they prove that supplication (du’aa) changes the Divine Destiny. So how can we reconcile between what is mentioned in the book and these texts? May Allah reward you with the good.


I think you are referring to what is stated in the book Al-Fikr Al-Islami (Islamic Thought) and not At-Tafkeer Al-Islami which was a mistake in the question. Also another mistake in the question was stating that (it is one of the adopted books); it is not adopted and it is mentioned in the Administration file under (The nonadopted books that are published by Hizb ut Tahrir, whether they carry the name of the Ameer, or a name of another member for other considerations, and they are not taught in Halaqas (closed circles), and then it mentions from these books: (Al-Fikr Al-Islami (Islamic Thought)). In any case, as I mentioned previously, it seems that you are referring to what was mentioned in the book: (But it must be clear that supplication (du’aa) does not change what is in the knowledge of Allah, does not avert a Divine fate, does not take away the Divine destiny, and nothing happens without its cause, because the knowledge of Allah is inevitably accomplished, and Allah’s Decree will take place inevitably. If it was turned back by supplication (du’aa), then it would not be a Divine fate (qadaa’), and the Divine destiny is founded by Allah; therefore, it is not taken away by supplication (du’aa)). You said that this contradicts this Hadith:

«إِنَّ الدُّعَاءَ يَرُدُّ الْقَضَاءَ»

“Supplication turns back the Divine fate (qadaa’).”In another narration:

«لَا يَرُدُّ الْقَدَرَ إِلَّا الدُّعَاءُ»

“Nothing averts the Divine Destiny (qadr) but supplication.” Your question is how to reconcile this contradiction?

Before I answer you, I will mention to you some related matters as an introduction to the answer:

1- The status of supplication (du’aa) in Islam and response to it, by Allah’s permission. There have been verses and Hadiths on this subject, including:

– Allah (swt) says:

[وَقَالَ رَبُّكُمُ ادْعُونِي أَسْتَجِبْ لَكُمْ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَكْبِرُونَ عَنْ عِبَادَتِي سَيَدْخُلُونَ جَهَنَّمَ دَاخِرِينَ]

“And your Lord has said, ‘Call upon Me, and I will respond to you.’ Indeed, those who disdain My worship will enter Hell in disgrace.” [Ghafir: 60]

– Al-Hakim narrated in his Mustadrak from Abu Huraira (ra) that he said: the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

«لَيْسَ شَيْءٌ أَكْرَمَ عَلَى اللَّهِ مِنْ الدُّعَاءِ»

“There is nothing more noble to Allah than supplication (du’aa).” Ahmad narrated in his Musnad from Abi Saeed that the Prophet (saw) said:

«مَا مِنْ مُسْلِمٍ يَدْعُو بِدَعْوَةٍ لَيْسَ فِيهَا إِثْمٌ وَلَا قَطِيعَةُ رَحِمٍ إِلَّا أَعْطَاهُ اللَّهُ بِهَا إِحْدَى ثَلَاثٍ إِمَّا أَنْ تُعَجَّل لَهُ دَعْوَتُهُ وَإِمَّا أَنْ يَدَّخِرَهَا لَهُ فِي الْآخِرَةِ وَإِمَّا أَنْ يَصْرِفَ عَنْهُ مِنْ السُّوءِ مِثْلَهَا قَالُوا إِذاً نُكْثِرُ قَالَ اللَّهُ أَكْثَرُ»

“There is no Muslim who calls upon Allah with words in which there is no sin or severing of family ties but Allah will give him one of three things: either He will answer his prayer soon, or He will store it up for him in the Hereafter, or He will remove something bad from him that is equivalent to what he is asking for.” They said, “Then we should make a great amount of du’aa’.” He said, “Allah is greater.” It is also narrated by Al-Hakim in his Mustadrak from Abi Saeed (ra).

These evidences show that Allah loves that His faithful servant supplicates to Him (swt) and increase his supplication, and that there is an answer to the du’aa by one of three as in the Musnad of Ahmad. And the response is recorded in Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz (protected Decree); everything that takes place is recorded since eternity as shown in the evidence of the Divine destiny (qadar) below.

2- If there is a definite evidence on an issue that indicates to a particular ruling and there is an indefinite evidence with Sahih narration (sanad) on the same matter that indicates another ruling in which there is a doubt (shubha) that contradicts the definite evidence, then in this case the two evidences are combined, because using the two evidences is more important than to ignore one of them. If it is not possible to combine the evidences then the definite evidence is taken, and the indefinite evidence is rejected in meaning (diraya) because its sanad (narration) is Sahih, but if its sanad is weak, it is rejected for its weakness.

3- From the evidences of Divine Destiny (qadr):

– Allah (swt) says:

[وَكَانَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ قَدَراً مَقْدُوراً]

“And ever is the command of Allah a destiny decreed” [Al-Ahzab: 38]. The meaning of


‘Divine Destiny’ here is any matter that has been decreed in eternity, and the meaning of


is that it will take place inevitably. Therefore it means that it is a decreed judgment that must happen.

[ومَا يَعْزُبُ عَنْ رَبِّكَ مِنْ مِثْقَالِ ذَرَّةٍ فِي الْأَرْضِ وَلا فِي السَّمَاءِ وَلا أَصْغَرَ مِنْ ذَلِكَ وَلا أَكْبَرَ إِلا فِي كِتَابٍ مُبِينٍ]

“And not absent from your Lord is any [part] of an atom’s weight within the earth or within the heaven or [anything] smaller than that or greater but that it is in a clear register” [Yunus: 61]

[عَالِمِ الْغَيْبِ لا يَعْزُبُ عَنْهُ مِثْقَالُ ذَرَّةٍ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَلا فِي الأَرْضِ وَلا أَصْغَرُ مِنْ ذَلِكَ وَلا أَكْبَرُ إِلا فِي كِتَابٍ مُبِين]

“[Allah is] the Knower of the unseen.” Not absent from Him is an atom’s weight within the heavens or within the earth or [what is] smaller than that or greater, except that it is in a clear register” [Saba: 3]

[مَا أَصَابَ مِنْ مُصِيبَةٍ فِي الأَرْضِ وَلا فِي أَنْفُسِكُمْ إِلا فِي كِتَابٍ مِنْ قَبْلِ أَنْ نَبْرَأَهَا إِنَّ ذَلِكَ عَلَى اللَّهِ يَسِيرٌ]…

“No disaster strikes upon the earth or among yourselves except that it is in a register before We bring it into being – indeed that, for Allah, is easy” [Al-Hadid: 22]

– Also there are Hadiths on the subject of Divine destiny (qadr) or the writing on Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz (Protected Decree), including:

On the authority of Abu Huraira, he said, the Prophet (saw) told me:

«جَفَّ الْقَلَمُ بِمَا أَنْتَ لاَقٍ»

“The pen has dried after writing what you are going to confront” [Bukhari]; that is, everything you will face that which has been written in eternity for it.

The Hadith of Umar from the Prophet (saw) about the arrival of Jibreel who asked about Islam and Iman; the Hadith states: “Inform me about Iman (faith).” He (the Prophet) answered,

«أَنْ تُؤْمِنَ بِاللَّهِ وَمَلائِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ وَتُؤْمِنَ بِالْقَدَرِ خَيْرِهِ وَشَرِّهِ»

“It is that you believe in Allah and His angels and His Books and His Messengers and in the Last Day, and in fate (qadar), both in its good and in its evil aspects.” [Muslim] i.e., to believe that Allah has decreed the good and the bad before creating the creation.

On the authority of Jabir, he said: The Prophet (saw) said:

«لاَ يُؤْمِنُ عَبْدٌ حَتَّى يُؤْمِنَ بِالْقَدَرِ خَيْرِهِ وَشَرِّهِ حَتَّى يَعْلَمَ أَنَّ مَا أَصَابَهُ لَمْ يَكُنْ لِيُخْطِئَهُ وَأَنَّ مَا أَخْطَأَهُ لَمْ يَكُنْ لِيُصِيبَهُ»

A slave (of Allah) shall not believe until he believes in Al-Qadar, its good and its bad, such that he knows that what struck him would not have missed him, and that what missed him would not have struck him.” [Tirmithi]

On the authority of Abi Al-Abbas Abdullah Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) that he said: One day, I was riding behind the Prophet () when he said:

«يا غُلاَمُ، إِنِّي أُعَلِّمُكَ كَلِمَاتٍ، احْفَظْ اللَّهَ يَحْفَظْكَ، احْفَظْ اللَّهَ تَجِدْهُ تُجَاهَكَ، إِذَا سَأَلْتَ فَاسْأَلِ اللَّهَ، وَإِذَا اسْتَعَنْتَ فَاسْتَعِنْ بِاللَّهِ، وَاعْلَمْ أَنَّ الأُمَّةَ لَوْ اجْتَمَعَتْ عَلَى أَنْ يَنْفَعُوكَ بِشَيْءٍ لَمْ يَنْفَعُوكَ إِلاَّ بِشَيْءٍ قَدْ كَتَبَهُ اللَّهُ لَكَ، وَلَوْ اجْتَمَعُوا عَلَى أَنْ يَضُرُّوكَ بِشَيْءٍ لَمْ يَضُرُّوكَ إِلاَّ بِشَيْءٍ قَدْ كَتَبَهُ اللَّهُ عَلَيْكَ، رُفِعَتْ الأَقْلامُ وَجَفَّتْ الصُّحُفُ»

“O boy! I will instruct you in some matters. Be watchful of Allah (Commandments of Allah), He will preserve you. Safeguard His Rights, He will be ever with you. If you beg, beg of Him Alone; and if you need assistance, supplicate to Allah Alone for help. And remember that if all the people gather to benefit you, they will not be able to benefit you except that which Allah had foreordained (for you); and if all of them gather to do harm to you, they will not be able to afflict you with anything other than that which Allah had pre-destined against you. The pens had been lifted and the ink had dried up”. [Tirmithi]

4- Now we discuss the two Hadiths; that Du’aa turns back the Divine fate and in another version, it turns back the Divine destiny:

Al- Hakim narrated in Al-Mustadrak on the two Sahih from Ibn Abbas, from Thawban, that the Prophet (saw) said:

«إِنَّ الدُّعَاءَ يَرُدُّ الْقَضَاءَ»

“Supplication turns back fate (qadaa’)”In another narration by Al-Hakim from Abdullah Ibn Abi Al-Ja’d, from Thawban (ra), he said; the Prophet (saw) said:

«لَا يَرُدُّ الْقَدَرَ إِلَّا الدُّعَاءُ»

“Nothing turns back Divine Decree (qadr) except supplication.” Al-Hakim said: (this is Hadith has a Sahih Sanad, but they did not narrate it)

5- By studying what is mentioned on the Divine destiny (qadr), especially the verses of definite in meaning, it is understood from this evidence that there is nothing on the earth or in the heaven except that Allah has decreed and recorded it with Him. Nothing takes place in existence except that it has already been decreed by Allah and is in His record. What is already decreed must take place and is inevitable, that is, nothing stops and prevents what is destined (qadr).

It is understood from the aforementioned two Hadiths that the du’aa averts Divine destiny (qadr), or the fate (qadaa’). The meaning here is the same, so there is a doubt (shubha) that contradicts the definite evidence on the qadr, and as mentioned above, the first is to combine the two Hadiths with the definite evidence, if possible; otherwise, the meaning of the Hadith is rejected (diraya).

6- Hence, after studying this matter, I say with Allah’s tawfeeq:

A- The Hadith:

«لَا يَرُدُّ الْقَدَرَ إِلَّا الدُّعَاءُ»

“Nothing turns back Divine destiny (qadar) except supplication,” in the real meaning of the word (turns away qadr) i.e. removes it from Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz (protected decree), this Hadith in this meaning is rejected by diraya (in meaning), because the decreed matter or destined is recorded in Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz (Protected Decree), and it must inevitably take place and nothing will stop its happening , i.e. it will not be wiped out of Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz (Protected Decree); therefore, the Hadith is rejected by Diraya (in meaning) if it cannot be combined (with the other Hadith), then the definite evidences on qadr are taken, i.e. the qadr must take place and is not averted. But before rejecting the meaning (diraya), effort must be exerted to combine all the definite and indefinite evidences, because using both evidences is of more priority than to ignore one of them.

B- In the Usul (of Fiqh) when it is impossible to find the truth due to a qareena (indication), obstructing the real meaning, which here is the definite evidences on qadr mentioned above, therefore the metaphoric understanding of the Hadith is taken if it is possible according to the language. This is possible here; the word qadr or qadaa’ in the Hadith is in the metaphorical sense and is understood by its consequences i.e. its effect; in other words, what is caused by it due to causation, so it mentions the reason, but the meaning is what is intended, like if you say: (the rain grew the earth) and you mention the cause (rain) and mean the result, the product, (the plant), and here qadr is also mentioned but what is intended is metaphoric meaning, i.e. its effect or what is its result, and therefore the aversion is not to the qadaa’ or the qadr, but to their effect, for example, if a qadaa’ or qadr befalls a Muslim, like an illness or a loss of a child, a loss of money, and a loss of trade etc, then the du’aa turns back the effect, as in the Hadith of Al-Hassan Bin Ali (ra) he said: that the Messenger (saw) taught me to say words in the Qunut of Al-Witr:

«اللَّهُمَّ اهْدِنِي فِيمَنْ هَدَيْتَ… وَقِنِي شَرَّ مَا قَضَيْتَ…»

 “O Allah, guide me among those whom You have guided … and save me from the evil of what You have decreed.” The believer, when he calls Allah in du’aa and increased the du’aa to protect him from the evil of the qadaa’, then Allah will ease its impact and help him to endure it and be patient upon it. Then Allah will make his life comfortable even after the qadaa’ has befallen on him. That is, Allah will ease the qadaa’ on him and lighten its impact. it is as if his du’aa has averted the qadaa’ metaphorically. That is, Allah has helped him to withstand the qadaa’ and gave him patience. How many men are injured by thorns, and they are weakened and shaken?, And how many men undergo disasters and yet their tongues are moist with the Zikr of Allah; a man supplicates to Allah to protect him from the evil of the calamity and its impact, and he is granted patience and his matters are straightened, as if his du’aa have averted the calamity metaphorically.

Thus, it is understood that qadr is inevitable and must take place, but the du’aa of the believer sincerely and faithfully will avert the impact on him, i.e. the impact will be eased and he will be helped to endure it and have patience dealing with it, and to lighten the weight of the calamity on him, and then he will enjoy the life as if the calamity did not occur.  All that is recorded in Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz; Allah has decreed it and knows it since Eternity. That is, it is recorded in Al-Lawh Al –Mahfouz, that it is destined that a calamity will befall on this slave and it will happen, and this slave will call on Allah (in du’aa) to protect him from its evil. Allah (swt) will respond to him and help him endure it and have patience dealing with it  as if it did not fall on him metaphorically.

This is how the Hadith understood. this is what I see as stronger (in opinion) Allah Most Knowledgeable and Most Wise.

7- For further information, I will mention the following:

A- In my book (At-Tayseer Fi Usul At-Tafseer) it states:

[Answering the du’aa (supplication) does not mean a change in fate or what is written in the Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz (protected Decree) or in the knowledge of Allah, i.e. Allah’s response does not mean that He (swt) did not know about the du’aa of his servant and that Allah will answer it, and therefore is not recorded in Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz, but rather Allah knows it and it’s recorded since eternity. Qadar is the knowledge of Allah, that is, what is written in Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz and everything that will take place is written in it since eternity. Allah (swt) knows that someone will supplicate to Him. If Allah decreed to answer, it is written that someone will call in supplication with such and such and that this will be achieved with such and such. Du’aa is not a new composition that is not in Allah’s knowledge or not written in AL-Lawh Al-Mahfouz, as well as the response. Rather all that will take place is recorded in Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz; Allah knows the unseen and knows what the servant does in word or deed, and everything is already written previously since eternity. Du’aa made by the servant is known to Allah and is recorded as it is. As well as His (swt) answer as desired by Allah (swt) is recorded since eternity. Du’aa and the answer are not above the knowledge of Allah, but they are recorded in Al-Lawh Al-Mahfouz as they are and as how they will happen. Allah is the Knower of the unseen and the seen

[لَا يَعْزُبُ عَنْهُ مِثْقَالُ ذَرَّةٍ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَلَا فِي الْأَرْضِ]

“[Allah is] the Knower of the unseen.” Not absent from Him is an atom’s weight within the heavens or within the earth” [Saba: 3]

B- It is stated in Sharh As-Sunnah by Abu Muhammad Al-Hussein Al-Baghawi Ash-Shafi’i (died 516 AH): [(Abdul Wahid ibn Ahmad Al-Malihi told us…from Abdullah Ibn Abi Al-Ja’d from Thawban, he said: The Prophet (saw) said:

«لا يَرُدُّ الْقَدَرَ إِلا الدُّعَاءُ»

“Nothing turns back Divine destiny (qadar) except supplication” …I said: Abu Hatim Al-Sajistani said (that one who continues to do du’aa (supplication) will accept the receipt of the qadaa’, as if it is averted)].

C- It is stated in “Murqat Al-Mafateeh Sharh Mishkat Al-Masabih” by Abu Al-Hassan Nur ud-Din Al-Mullah Al-Harawi Al-Qari (deceased: 1014 AH):

[His Saying:

«لا يَرُدُّ الْقَضَاءَ إِلا الدُّعَاءُ»

“Nothing turns back the Decree destiny (qadaa’) except supplication” Qadaa’ is the decreed matter … or he meant by “averting” of qadaa’ if he meant easing it and making the matter light, as if it has not been sent…]

I hope that this is sufficient, and Alhamdulillah, Lord of the Worlds.


16 Rabii’ Al-Awwal 1441 AH
13/11/2019 CE
Read More

Posted on Dec 12, 2019

Not Being Tempted Away from Islamic Ruling

Not Being Tempted Away from Islamic Ruling

In a time where the world has been overcome with the rule of man-made systems, systems that have seen growing unrest in all its corners because of the dysfunctionality nurtured by an inherently biased and limited rule, the desire for change amongst humanity can simultaneously be a great opportunity as well as a dangerous force. A great opportunity, because those that have taken divine guidance as their basis for thought and action can project their message upon a population searching for a better way.  A dangerous force, because during tough times compromise with either those in authority or with those seeking change may seem an attractive and shortened path. The danger can be averted though, by those assured of their way understanding what they want and the way that change needs to be achieved.

Islam in its most foundational basis is believing in the existence of the Creator of the universe  and that His (SWT) final message to humanity, The Quran, was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ). It will naturally follow that Allah’s (SWT) judgment on any matter is the best and only outcome worthy of implementation, otherwise believing that Allah (SWT) is our creator becomes meaningless.

Verse 49 in Surat al-Ma’idah is one verse amongst many emphasising that ruling or judgement must be referred to what Allah (SWT) has revealed. The verse however, also issues a warning to beware of people tempting the Prophet (ﷺ), and by extension his (ﷺ) followers, away from His (SWT) ruling.

Allah (SWT) says:

وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ وَاحْذَرْهُمْ أَن يَفْتِنُوكَ عَن بَعْضِ مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ إِلَيْكَ ۖ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ أَن يُصِيبَهُم بِبَعْضِ ذُنُوبِهِمْ ۗ وَإِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ النَّاسِ لَفَاسِقُونَ

And judge, [O Muhammad], between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations and beware of them, lest they tempt you away from some of what Allah has revealed to you. And if they turn away – then know that Allah only intends to afflict them with some of their [own] sins. And indeed, many among the people are defiantly disobedient. [Surat al-Ma`idah:49]

The books of tafseer narrate that this verse was revealed  when Ka`b bin Asad, Ibn Saluba, `Abdullah bin Surya and Shas bin Qays said to each other, `Let us go to Muhammad to try and misguide him from his religion.’ So they went to the Prophet and said, `O Muhammad! You know that we are the scholars, noblemen and chiefs of the Jews. If we follow you, the Jews will follow suit and will not contradict us. But, there is enmity between us and some of our people, so we will refer to you for judgement in this matter, and you should rule in our favour against them and we will believe in you.’ The Messenger of Allah refused the offer and Allah sent down these Ayat about them.

Although this verse was revealed after this particular incident, the verse is applicable to all times and situations within this subject of ruling according to the famous principle that “the meaning is in the generality of the words and not upon the specifics of the cause (of revelation)”.

The following verse continues:

أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ ۚ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللَّهِ حُكْمًا لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ

Then is it the judgement of [the time of] ignorance they desire? But who is better than Allah in judgement for a people who are certain [in faith]. [Surat al-Ma`idah:50]

Ibn Katheer in his tafseer, comments on this, saying:

“Allah criticizes those who ignore Allah’s commandments, which include every type of righteous good thing and prohibit every type of evil, but they refer instead to opinions, desires and customs that people themselves invented, all of which have no basis in Allah’s religion. During the time of Jahiliyyah, the people used to abide by the misguidance and ignorance that they invented by sheer opinion and lusts. The Tatar (Mongols) abided by the law that they inherited from their king Genghis Khan who wrote Al-Yasiq, for them. This book contains some rulings that were derived from various religions, such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Many of these rulings were derived from his own opinion and desires. Later on, these rulings became the followed law among his children, preferring them to the Law of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger…… Who is more just in decision than Allah for those who comprehend Allah’s Law, believe in Him, who are certain that Allah is the best among those who give decisions and that He is more merciful with His creation than the mother with her own child Allah has perfect knowledge of everything, is able to do all things, and He is just in all matters.”

Ibn Katheer here relates the verse to different ages, from the time prior and during Muhammad’s (SAW) Prophethood and also using the example from the time of the rule of the Mongols.

Sayid Qutb, in his ‘In the Shade of the Quran’ comments on these verses highlighting the connection between implementing Allah’s (SWT) rules and Iman (belief):

“God (limitless is He in His glory) says that this whole issue is one of faith or unfaith, Islam or non-Islam, Divine law or human prejudice. No compromise or reconciliation can be worked out between these two sets of values. Those who judge on the basis of the law God has revealed, enforcing all parts of it and substituting nothing else for it, are the believers. By contrast, those who do not make the law God has revealed the basis of their judgement are unbelievers, wrongdoers and transgressors. Rulers can either implement God’s law in total and, thus, they remain within the area of faith, or they may enforce some other law. In this latter case, all three descriptions of unbelief, wrongdoing and transgression apply to them. If people accept God’s rule and judgement, administered by rulers and judges, then they are believers. Otherwise, they are not. There is no middle way between the two, nor can any justification or claim of serving legitimate interests be admitted. God, the Lord of mankind, knows what serves people’s interests and He has enacted His laws for that very purpose. No law or system of government is superior to His. No servant of God may reject God’s law or claim to have better knowledge than God with regard to what serves people’s interests. If he makes such a claim, by word or deed, then he pronounces himself an unbeliever………..The other consideration in this whole issue is the fact that God’s law is inevitably and absolutely better for mankind than any manmade law. It is to this fact that the final verse in this passage refers: “But for those who are firm in their faith, who can be a better law giver than God?” (Verse 50)”

The verse is an incredible source of contemplation and direction during these times. As the movement and desire for change increases in momentum, Muslims must resist any temptation or excuse to abandon or hide the call for the Implementation of Allah’s (SWT) deen. No justification can hold given the clear instruction given by Allah (SWT) in this verse. Whether it be for the excuse of “uniting” people, gaining support and sympathy from the International community, or for fear that the world powers gather against the Ummah, nothing can justify going against Allah’s (SWT) ahkam in word or deed.

Sayid Qutb further comments:

“It is a false notion to try to unite people at the expense of God’s law. Moreover, the attempt is bound to fail. The price asked is too high, since any modification of God’s law will lead to corruption on earth, injustice and the subservience of some people to others. This is, indeed, a great evil. If no compromise of God’s law is admissible for pursuing the noble purpose of uniting people, how can it be justified for something which is more petty. Some of those who claim to be Muslims argue that God’s law should not be implemented so that we do not lose the tourist trade!

It is either God’s law or man-made law, based on inadequate knowledge and vain desire. There can be no meeting ground between the two. “Do they desire to be ruled by the law of pagan ignorance? But for those who are firm in their faith, who can be a better law giver than God?” (Verse 50) This statement defines the meaning of jāhiliyyah, rendered here as “pagan ignorance”, as the term is used in the Qur’ān. Jāhiliyyah means that people are ruled by people, because this signifies that they submit to one another. They refuse to submit to God alone and reject His Godhead, acknowledging instead that some human beings have qualities of Godhead and hence they submit to their authority. As such, the term pagan ignorance, or jāhiliyyah, does not refer to a particular period of time, but to a certain situation which may come into existence at any time. Whenever it exists, it must be described as jāhiliyyah which is in contrast to Islam.

What can anyone say in justification of setting God’s law aside and substituting for it a law of jāhiliyyah, placing in the process his own desires, or those of a particular community or generation, above God’s law? What can he say if, in spite of this, he still claims to be a Muslim? What is his justification: circumstances, events, people’s unwillingness, or fear of the enemy? Were all these not known to God when He commanded Muslims to implement His law and follow His way of life and never be tempted away from any part of His revelations? Or does he justify his attitude by claiming that God’s law does not cater for new needs and new situations? Were these needs and situations not known to God when He made this very stern warning?”

The opportunity that presents itself to the ummah today as the world order falters must be seized upon through the instruction of these noble verses. If we are to shy away, for one reason or another, from calling for and working towards the return of Islamic rule, then we would have lost both our akhirah and the justice and harmony in this world that would naturally result from implementing our Creator’s system of governance.  The Prophet (ﷺ) is indeed our greatest example in staying steadfast upon the divine course despite the offers presented to him by the power brokers, despite the criticism by family members and the wider society,  and despite the intimidation and persecution meted out by his enemies. Indeed, nothing concerned him (ﷺ) save the preservation of the pure divine message which would ultimately elevate humanity.

Read More

Posted on Dec 6, 2019

When the Muslim Commander Reached the Gates of China

When the Muslim Commander Reached the Gates of China


Occupied East Turkistan (Xinjang- west China) has been going through an intensification of repression by the Chinese regime. All things Islam are being criminalised, from Hijab, the beard, to prayer. Muslims are being rounded up in mass concentration camps, Muslim women are forced to marry Chinese men, organs forcefully harvested, and historic mosques totally destroyed.   Such is the situation of the Ummah when we are left without the shield of the Khilafah, as described by Rassulallah (ﷺ). When the shield was present, we recall the fear the Muslims instilled into the Chinese rulers. The History of al-Tabari narrates the time the Muslims went to China.

The Muslim commander Qutaybah bin Muslim Al-Bahilee opened Turkestan – the West of Central Asia and opened its two major cities, Samarkand and Bukhara, in 94 AH, and then he turned towards the east until he reached Kashgar, which in those times was the capital of East Turkestan, which China now calls Xinjiang, and he completed its opening in the year 95 AH. He then stopped at the gates of China. This is where we pickup from in ‘The History of al-Tabari’

“Qutaybah penetrated far, until he drew near to China. The king of China wrote to Qutaybah, ‘send to us one of the nobles who are with you, that he may tell us about you and we may ask him about your religion.’ Qutaybah chose twelve from his army from assorted tribes, good-looking, beefy men, eloquent, hirsute, and brave, this being after he had asked about them and found them to be the best of those from among them in wisdom.” Al-tabari continues to describe how Qutayba then “ordered that they be well equipped with weapons, fine silk, embroidered garments, soft delicate white clothing, sandals, and perfume.” Qutaybah then mounted them on fine horses.

One of the delegates, Hubayrah al-Kilabi, was asked by Qutayba, “O Hubayrah, how are you going to conduct this?” Hubayrah replied that he would do as Qutaybah wished. Qutaybah then instructed “Go with God’s blessing; through God comes success. Do not remove your turbans until you reach the King’s country. When you enter into his presence, inform him that I have sworn that I shall not depart until I tread on their land, seal (take captives) the necks of their kings, and collect their tax.”

“When they arrived, the king sent to them, summoning them. They bathed and emerged wearing white clothes with tunics underneath, they applied perfume, put on sandals and fine outer garments and entered into the king’s presence; with him were high ranking officials of his kingdom. They sat down, and neither the king nor any of those with him spoke to them, the Muslims then stood and left. The king said to those who were present with him, ‘what do you make of these people?’ They said, ‘we think they are people who are nothing but women…’

“On the next day the king sent for them, and they wore embodied garments, fine turbans, and matarif and went to him in the morning. When they entered into his presence, they were told, ‘return.’ The king then asked his officials, ‘what do you think of this attire?’ They said, ‘this attire is more like the attire of men than the first one was. They are indeed men.’

“On the third day the king sent for them, and they strapped on their weapons, wore their head mail and helmets, girded themselves with their swords, took up their spears, shouldered their bows, mounted their horses, and went to him in the morning. The king of China looked at them, and he saw what resembled mountains advancing. When they drew to him, they fixed their spears into the ground. Then they advanced towards the king and his officials, tucking up their garments. Before they could enter, they were told to return because of the fear that had entered the hearts of the king and his officials.

“They departed; they mounted their horses, pulled up their spears, and urged on their horses, as if pursuing one another with them. The king said to his officials, ‘what do you think of them?’ They said, ‘We have never seen the like of these.’ In the evening the king sent a message to them: ‘send me your leader, the worthiest of you as a man.’ They sent Hubayrah to him. When Hubayrah reached the king, the king said to him, ‘you have seen the might of my dominion and that no one can protect you from me while you are in my country. You are in the position of an egg in the palm of my hand. I am going to ask you about something, and , if you do not tell me the truth, I shall kill you,’ Hubayrah said, ‘Ask!’ The king then said, ‘why did you do what you did with your dress on the first, second and third days?’ Hubayrah then replied, ‘ as for the first day, that is what we wear among our families, as for the second day, that is what we wear when we go to our amirs. As for the third day, that is our dress for our enemies, when we are provoked, we dress thus.’ ”

The dress turned out to be a symbol of the three options given to the inhabitants of the land whom the Muslims wish to conquer, namely:  1. Accept Islam and be part of our family, 2. Pay the jizyah and accept to be ruled by Islam (political dress), 3. War.

The king then asked Hubayrah to ” ‘depart to your master and tell him to depart, for I know his greed/excessive desire and the small number of his companions; otherwise I shall send against you someone who will destroy both you and him.’ Hubayrah then said, ‘ How can one whose front cavalry are in your land, while the last of them are in places where the olive trees grow, be said to have a small number of companions? How can one who has left the world behind him, under his control, and has campaigned against you, be charged with greed/excessive desire? As for your attempt to scare us with being killed. We have allotted life spans; when their ends come about, the noblest of them involves being killed. We do not dislike that, nor do we fear it.’ The king then asked  ‘what then will satisfy your master(Qutaybah)?’ Hubayrah answered, ‘He has sworn an oath that he will not depart until he trends on your land, seals(take captives) your kings, and is given tax.’

“The King then offered, ‘we shall extricate/release him from his oath. We shall send some soil from the soil of our land, so that he may tread on it; we shall send him some of our sons so that he can seal their necks; and we shall send him some tax, so that he may be pleased with it.’ the narrator then said that he called for some dishes of gold with soil in them, and he sent silk and gold and four young men from amongst his sons of their kings, he gave them leave to depart and presented them with gifts, and they went off and reached Qutaybah with what the king had sent. Qutaybah accepted the tax, sealed the necks of the king’s sons and returned them, and trod on the soil.”

Today, the Chinese regime knows that the commander of the 2nd righteous Khilafah will not accept such an offer, especially given that they have waged a war of genocide against the Muslims of East Turkestan.

Read More

Pin It on Pinterest