Question: Assalamu alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,
It was mentioned in the book “The Islamic Personality: Part III” on the second category of the Hasan Hadith, after dividing it into two types, the following:
“The narrator must be renowned for his sincerity and honesty even though he has not achieved the standard of the Sahih narrators in terms of memorisation and accuracy. The Hasan Hadith is used as proof exactly as the Sahih Hadith. What is listed of Ahadith in the books of the Imams, their students and other ‘Ulema and Fuqahaa is considered part of the Hasan Hadith and is advanced as proof because they used it as evidence on Shari’ah rule (Hukm) or extracted a rule from it. It is a Hasan Hadith, whether it is contained in the books of Fiqh or Usul Al-Fiqh, on the condition that the books are approved books such as: al-Mabsut, al-Omm, and al-Mudawwana al-Kubra and the like, and not like the books of al-Bajuri and al-Shanshori and their example. However, the reported Ahadith in the books of Tafseer (interpretation) they are not considered and are not advanced as proof even if the interpreter is a Mujtahid Imam, because it was mentioned in the interpretation of a verse and not to extract a rule, and there is a difference between them, and because the commentators usually do not care about checking the Ahadith they cite, because of this these Ahadith are not considered merely for their appearance in the interpretation as is the case in the books of Fiqh of the Imams and scholars, but it is necessary to search for a Hadith even through Taqleed, by asking the people of Hadith or referring to a book of the considered the books of Hadith”.
Question: How do we determine that what was quoted by the Fuqahaa and Usuliyyoon (scholars of Usul) in the pioneered Fiqh or Usul books as Hasan? Is our trust in their knowledge and their status sufficient for what they use as proof to be correctly attributed to the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم knowing that the great Imams differed in the Science of Hadith?
And how we direct the saying of Imam Al-Shafi’i and other Imams: “If the Hadith is true, strike my saying by the wall?” As if it gives an indication to investigate what he says, question it and audit it? Is it sufficient for a Hadith to be mentioned in one of the approved pioneered Fiqh or Usul books or is it required to be mentioned in a number of them? And if it is required to be in a number of them shall not there be present other controls for example, that the mentioning of the Hadith must not be in a number of books of one Madh’hab, but it should be mentioned in the approved books of more than one Madh’hab?
May Allah help you Abu Hanifa.
From: Aladdin Abdullah
There have been recent news reports of American aircraft carrying out air raids on some sites controlled by the IS organisation in Northern Iraq. Statements by Obama and some American officials were issued explaining that this measure was taken for humanitarian reasons and from fear of genocide and such talk. Although there were tougher and worse massacres that have taken place in Syria, but America did not intervene, even in Iraq massacres have occurred in Anbar and Fallujah, yet America also did not intervene which means that the motive of humanitarian and the like is not a convincing reason for the American planes raids in the north of Iraq. This can be understood from the track of events… the question is: If this understanding is correct, and that this is not the reason for the raids… then I wish if possible to get an explanation for the real reason that you see according to your political analysis of current events, and May Allah reward you with the good.
Question: Media reported on the day of Eid al-Fitr, 28/07/2014, that Ali Saleh, the former President of Yemen had prayed Eid along with Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, the current president, as if they were good friends! While Hadi, since taking office has done work that demolished what Saleh built during his thirty years of his rule, of building army leaders loyal to the British of his sons, cousins, relatives and loyalists, but Hadi cut their wings! He also held cabinet, military and security reshuffles a month ago, in the framework of the so-called government reforms. America had his influence on the introduction of ministers affiliated with it and the dismissal of leaders in the era of Saleh including his children and relatives… and the influence of America in these decisions is obvious… Hadi took a soft stand towards the Houthis. This was evident during the Houthis’ occupation of Imran in 09/07/2014 and the killing of a brigade commander… This, as well as the attacks that took place against the Ministry of Defence and the rumours that they are coups on Hadi and that Ali Saleh was behind it, which means that Hadi and Saleh are mortal enemies and are not close friends! So how can this be understood? Especially that Hadi was Saleh’s vice president, and if has was not like him walking with the British he wouldn’t have appointed him as his deputy, so how can he antagonize him so? I have been mixed up on these things, could you please clarify this matter:
Is Hadi walking with the English or with America? Then were the attacks on the Ministry of Defence coup attempts?
Question: There are some comments on some websites that state: “That Hizb ut Tahrir has defined the method of seeking the Nussrah (material support) to establish the Khilafah, while it abides to, and does not acknowledge any other Legislative (Shari’) method… although there is another method, which is “the method of the dominant Sultan”, i.e. the one who establishes the state by force and fighting… they also said that Hizb ut Tahrir objected Baghdadi’s declaration out of Hizbi prejudice, as the Hizb does not acknowledge the Khilafah as a legitimate one except if it established it…” Can you please provide a conclusive and sufficient answer for these statements? May Allah reward you.
Imitation (Taqleed) and Leaving the Opinion of One Scholar (Mujtahid) for Another Mujtahid; Achieving more than One Value from One Action
Question: Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuhu
Firstly, May Allah light your path and guide your way and grant you strength and support.
I have several important questions regarding the Hizb books, I am from the sons of the Hizb; I pray that the answers will soothe our chests as we have given a pledge to you.
1. It was mentioned in the book The System of Islam (English version p. 96), “If the muqalid follows a mujtahid in a hukum of any issue and acts accordingly, he is not allowed to leave that hukm for another mujtahid at all.”
The word “Mutlaqan” (at all) here, does not comply with our understanding that when we realise a mistake we do not leave it and go to the right opinion; how is it the case then if I follow a mujtahid and then discover later that he is a hypocrite wrongdoer (fasiq) do I remain as a follower to him? And if I discover that this mujtahid that I follow has a weak opinion, do I continue in following him? If for example I realise that I followed him in a prohibited issue that is based on a very weak hadeeth… do I continue following what I took from him?
2. In the book The System of Islam, it also mentions that the mujtahid is allowed to leave his opinion for the benefit of the Muslims. Same as what took place with Othman (ra) during his Bay’ah. I would like to see a narration of the story, when looking for it I did not see a correction for it, instead what I found is that it is unacceptable. Are there other correct narrations? Can you please provide evidence from the consensus of the companions to permit imitation in opinion?
3. Can one action achieve more than one value or not, for instance if you study a specific discipline and your aim is to please Allah and also a material gain.
From: Hijazi Shaheen
To all the brothers and sisters who sent inquiries about the declaration of the organization’s establishment of the Khilafah State and my apologies for not writing your names, they are too long to list.
Assalamu alaikum wa Rahmatullah wa Barakatahu,
We have previously duly sent an answer and I reiterate:
Dear Brothers and sisters,
Question: US President was one of the first to congratulate the victory of Janata Party and its leader Modi, where he has invited him to visit Washington; so it was announced on 05/06/2014 that Modi will make this visit in the month of September. The inauguration of India’s new Prime Minister, Modi, took place on 26/05/2014 after the announcement of landslide victory of his party, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), with 282 seats of the total 545 seats in the parliament’s seats, except two seats to be elected by the president, inflicting a heinous historic defeat to the Indian Congress party, which won 44 seats. It is for the first time that the Prime Minister of Pakistan to attend such a ceremony, following Modi’s invitation to him to attend it and to meet with him. What are the implications of that? And how will the relations between the two countries pursue within the US policy and plans in relation to the two countries and the region and its impact on China and Afghanistan?
Question: To: Moadh Seif Elmi
Our honourable Sheikh, Assalamu Alaikum. Is the hadeeth regarding the Muslims going out in two rows, one headed by Omar (ra) and the other by Hamza (ra), weak? Thank you.
Question: Yesterday on 02/06/2014 it was announced that the prime minister with the disputed legitimacy, Ahmad Meitik, managed to enter the prime minister’s headquarters in the capital Tripoli, amid tight military reinforcements belonging to the shield of the central area Misrata… It was the National Congress that held in 25/5/2014 a session in Tripoli, which passed a vote of confidence for the new prime minister, Ahmed Meitik, while Abdullah Ath-Thani, the former prime minister, refused to hand over the government to the new prime minister. On 29/5/2014 the former prime minister held a meeting for his government in its headquarters, while the new prime minister held a meeting for his cabinet in a hotel. The date for the parliamentary elections was announced on 25/06/2014. The retired officer, Khalifa Haftar, announced on 16/05/2014 his rebellion against the Congress and his rejection to the government, and called for the parliament to be dissolved and for the postponement of the elections. An American and European movement has been observed in relation to what is happening on the ground in Libya. What is the relationship between this movement to what is taking place there? And what is its relationship with the rebellion of this retired officer and what is its objective?
Question: Assalamu Alaikum our honorable Ameer,
We say that establishment of Khilafah and Jihad are different obligations justifying the point that Jihad can’t be the methodology to establish the Khilafah. Can you explain that these two are different obligations?
May Allah (swt) accept from you and give you the responsibility to guide the Ummah. (End)