The Taliban: Zuhd in Dunya

16-06-2008

by Khatib

Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem

With the name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Most Beneficent!

The Taliban: Allah’s Blessing on Afghanistan

The following is a brief extract from replies given to various questions submitted by a non-Muslim in the month of Jumaada al-Thaani, 1428.

How do you, as a Muslim, regard heathens such as myself?

If a Muslim is striving to follow Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammaah - and thus using only the criteria of Quran and Sunnah for judgement - then they would be well-mannered and honourable, providing such manners and honour were reciprocated. That has always been the Muslim way (see Note 3).

However, if there is disrespect, or bad manners, or intolerance or hatred, toward the Muslim and/or toward Muslims in general, then there can be no such respect shown, as is clear from the following quote from the Quran:

“Allah does not forbid you from treating honourably those who do not act against you because of your Deen, or who have not driven you from your dwellings, for Allah loves those who act with honour. But Allah forbids you from treating with respect, or befriending, those who act against you because of your Deen, or have driven you from your dwellings or aided others to do this - for those of you who do this are without honour.” 60: 8-9 Interpretation of Meaning

The reality of the present is that the Zionists and their lackeys - who currently of course include Bush and Blair and Brown - demand that we Muslims accept the Tawagheet of the West and refuse to allow us to have a land of our own where we can live, as Muslims, ruled by an Ameer (a leader) who rules according to Shariah only: a land not dominated by the West. Of course, in their utter hypocrisy, in their dishonour, these lackeys talk and write about bringing “freedom” and “fighting terrorism” and “bringing civilization” when what they mean is: (1) bringing a new colonial domination and oppression, with the “freedom” to believe only what they deem is acceptable to them; (2) fighting, killing, torturing, imprisoning and brainwashing those who oppose their plans; and (3) bringing the decadent, dishonourable ways of the modern West to everyone, which ways they, in their utter arrogance and prejudice, believe are superior. The “tolerance” of these lackeys extends only to those who accept these ignorant, dishonourable, ways of theirs.

As I have written elsewhere, there is indeed a great clash involved here, exemplified most clearly by the Taliban. For those Muslims who understand, the Taliban represent genuine Islam - which is based upon the perspective of Jannah, with this mortal life (and all its delights and pleasures) being only of secondary importance. That is, the Taliban express the fundamental if rather neglected principle of Zuhd in Dunya - the sacred, and honour, are more important than worldly possessions, than personal happiness.

The scorn of many people in the West toward the Taliban is indicative of their own Western arrogance, prejudice, and of their ignorance of Deen Al-Islam. Thus, such people regard the Taliban as “backward”, and they regarded the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan under Mullah Umar (hafidhahullah) as “uncivilized” and a step back into “the dark ages” or whatever. That is, they judged and judge the Taliban according to the values, the concepts, of the West believing such values, such concepts, in their ignorance, to be “universal”. Thus did they and do they accept that is “right” for the West to interfere in Afghanistan, to kill and imprison and torture Muslims, so that the poor ignorant Muslims can be enlightened and given “progess” and “democracy” (i.e. the corrupt hypocritical tyranny of the West) and given the benefits of the West (such as liberalism, dishonour, decadence, bad-manners, drug-addiction and crime-infested communities).

Now, I know that the majority of the Taliban are honourable: noble warriors whose desire is to live a simple, honourable, life in accord with the commands of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala. It is almost as if they belong to “another world” - as if they hark back to a time when life was simpler; when it was good (in the sense of honourable, noble); when people knew what was and is really important about life. And of course they do belong to a different world, to a different time, from the modern world: they belong to the world of Deen Al-Islam; to the time of the Prophet (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) at Madinah. Being with such people - sharing a simple meal with them, praying with them - thus feeling, knowing, their loyalty, their honour, their uncomplicated commitment to enjoining the honourable and forbidding the dishonourable, is a reminder of this other world: the world of the sacred, of the numinous, of Tawheed; a reminder of what it is that the West, in its hubris, has lost; which is why, of course, the arrogant, materialistic Zionist-Crusader alliance invaded Afghanistan and is trying so hard to destroy the Taliban and why so many Muslims, world-wide, support the Taliban and want to see the arrogant infidels of the West, and their apostate lackeys, defeated.

You say that, “the Taliban represent genuine Islam”. Now, I do not doubt that the Taliban have been severely maligned in the West, but before the US occupation of Afghanistan the Taliban were responsible for the destruction of the two giant Buddha statues. This destruction could be seen as indicative of the intolerance Islam has for other religions, and does seem to contradict the impression you gave that Islam is respectful towards other religions.

What the West and its apostate lackeys think or believe about the Taliban and their actions - and what they use to base their kaffir opinions on - are irrelevant. One has to go beyond all the Zionist-Crusader rhetoric, lies and propaganda in order to understand the context and the truth of what occurred. The context was two-fold. First, the issue of the sanctions which the West imposed on Afghanistan, then one of the poorest countries in the world. The United Nations announced that it would give money to aid or support the protection of the restoration of the statues while many people in Afghanistan, as a result of the harsh, punitive sanctions imposed by the arrogant hypocritical West, were starving and dying of starvation. Many of the Taliban thus regarded this offer of aid for such statues as an insult, with the West and its lackeys seeming to favour such statues over the lives of Muslims. Second, this gave impetus to the campaign to destroy the statues, which some Ulaamah in Afghanistan at the time regarded as idols which could, according to Quran and Sunnah, be destroyed if they were or had become a focus to divert people away from the path of Deen Al-Islam and thus from what is really important about life - which is Jannah; which is honour; and not this world, and not the preservation, at the cost of human lives, of some artefacts. Certainly, the statues had become the focus for “international attention” and thus became a type of idol for many - and the Taliban decided to make a point (about the hypocrisy of the West and sanctions, and about Deen Al-Islam) which of course, the West and its apostate lackeys in the West and in some Muslims lands, either did not understand or choosed to deliberately mis-understand and use as part of their on-going propaganda campaign against the Taliban.

In addition, note that the Taliban never destroyed any places of worship - and neither would they have done, for as Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala says:

“There should be no coercion concerning a Way of Life.” 2:256 Interpretation of Meaning

Was the destruction of the Buddhas in accordance with Islamic teaching or were the Taliban in error? If such iconoclasm is in accord with Islamic teaching, can we look forward to similar acts of destruction in countries where Muslims are now settling in large numbers?

What is often forgotten about Deen Al-Islam, or not understood, is that there is no “Islamic teaching” about such matters because there is no worldly central authority, and no dogma, in Deen Al-Islam. That is, each situation, each case, and such matters as you mention, are assessed locally by local Ulaamah and/or an Ameer, using the guidelines of Quran, Sunnah and thus Shariah. Action proceeds on the basis of such local informed guidance. Thus, an Ameer (or Khalifah) would consult with Ulaamah, and others who might have specific knowledge about a certain matter, and he then would make a decision based on the advice given. That is, a specific decision, or course of action, taken by an Ameer results from his own personal judgement, and from the advice given to him by Ulaamah and those who are involved in the matter or who possess knowledge of the matter in question. It does not result from following some rigid dogma or from pursuing in some sort of zealous way his own hawah (desires/goals/agenda).

This Muslim way - the heart of Shariah - is a very civilized, a very human, way of doing things, and once again is a way, a means of doing things, which is far superior to each and every way of the arrogant West.

To quote from an article I wrote about Siyasah:

An Ameer also gives bayah - to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), to be responsible for those whom he leads. It is a sacred trust. This bayah, and the honour upon which it is based, allow for the exercise of personal judgement in practical matters - that is, the Ameer-ul-Mumineen, the Khalifah, and the Khilafah in general, are human; they do not allow themselves to be governed by too many rules and regulations, for it is their Islam, their submission to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), their honour, their loyalty, and the judgement which arises from these, which are important, not human-made rules and regulations. That is, an official, a representative, of the Khalifah is expected to be an honourable individual, devoted to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), who is allowed, even expected, to use their own judgement, always basing that judgement on the Quran and Sunnah and always aware of how they will be called to account, by Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, for their actions.

This principle of personal judgement - this lack of over-burdening rules and regulations - this humanity, is evident, for example, in the rule of Umar ibn al-Khattab (Radhiallahu ‘anhu) as recorded in the many Ahadith concerning him (see also Tarikh al-Khulafa by Jalal-uddin As-Suyut). It is evident in the Hadith regarding Mu’adh ibn Jaba (narrated by Abu Musa):

When Allah’s Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) sent him and Mu’adh bin Jabal to Yemen, he said to them: “Make things easy for the people rather than difficult; provide them with reports of good, and do not let them turn away [from what is honourable]. You should both work together, with mutual respect, understanding and loyalty.” Bukhari, Vol 8, Book 73, Number 145

Thus, Muhammad (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) - after entrusting them with the duty of ruling Yemen - did not go into great detail about what they should do, or provide them with detailed plans or burden them with regulations. Instead, he trusted them to act, to behave, as Muslims - with honour, fairness, and with the knowledge that they would be held accountable by Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala for their deeds.

This makes the practical implementation of Siyasah - the Khilafah - very different from the Western State with its abstract loyalty, its bureaucracy, its ever more powerful Police forces, its ever-increasing human-made, fallible, laws, and its remote politicians who pander to some passing idea, some trendy philosophy, or some human-made, fallible, ever-changing, “political programme” and who often lie, and use propaganda, in order to manipulate people, and secure their vote in some election.

For Islam, the supreme authority, the supreme judge, is Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, and representatives of the Khilafah - from the Khalifah (Ameer-ul-Mumineen), to each and every Qadi, to each and every Ameer who has given bayah to the Khalifah - are only intermediaries, striving to do their honourable duty, and allowed to do their duty by virtue of the trust that has been placed in them. As intermediaries between Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and the Muslims, they are expected to act in accordance with the Quran and Sunnah, and with honour, with fairness, and often with mercy, with forgiveness, for as Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala says:

“Remember that Allah is The Most Merciful, He Who Often Forgives.” 5:34 Interpretation of Meaning

“Hukm is for Allah alone.” 6:57 Interpretation of Meaning

Thus, it is impossible to give or issue specific answers to theoretical questions concerning what an Ameer might due in some future theoretical scenario. So, would a future Khalifah sanction the destruction of what the West would or might consider “cultural objects or artefacts”? Possibly not; possibly yes, in some particular circumstances, if a valid reason existed and if such an action was considered, by local Ulaamah, as in accordance with the Quran and Sunnah.

Furthermore, one might have the situation that one Ameer at one time might choose a certain course of action, and another Ameer at another time might choose another different course of action. The history of Muslim lands - the history of the Khilafah - has many such examples, just as a Qadi (a Muslim judge in a Shariah Court) in reaching a judgement about a specific case always follows the general guidelines of Quran and Sunnah and applies these to the individual circumstances which pertain at the time. That is, such Muslim justice is human; flexible and honourable; in complete contrast to the almost inhuman inflexible so-called “justice” of the West based on abstract human-manufactured, fallible, and constantly changing laws.

In respect of the Taliban, they have always striven to follow the guidance of the Quran and the Sunnah - that is, whatever they have done has been done because the advice of Ulaamah was being followed, or because an Ameer (such as Mullah Omar, hafidhahullah) had taken a decision after consulting with Ulaamah and others. That does not make them infallible - they may mistakes mistakes, as all Muslims (including some of the Mujahideen) make mistakes sometimes. But, for Muslims, actions are judged by intention - and their intention was and is to obey only Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala: to use only the criteria of Quran and Sunnah as the basis for their judgement because they look to Jannah rather than to the rewards of this world.

In the particular circumstances pertaining at the time in Afghanistan, the judgement that was made was made with due respect for the Shariah principles involved. At another time, under different circumstances, it is possible that another judgement might be made by another Ameer, following advice from other Ulaamah. As to whether, in this particular matter on this particular occasion, and according to Shariah, they were in error, then, as often with Muslims, there is some divergence of opinion, with some inclining toward the view that were correct (with, for instance, the statues having become idols again by virtue of the Western propaganda campaign directed at the Taliban in respect of this issue) and others inclining toward the view that the Taliban may have been mistaken. I incline toward the view that they were correct, wa Allahu Alam.

Whatever the opinion of Muslims about this particular matter, there is no dispute at all that aiding the West against the Taliban - whatever reasons or excuses are given - is wrong, a dishonourable betrayal of one’s brothers and sisters, contrary to Deen Al-Islam. Such a betrayal - such co-operation with the kuffar - is clear kufr and one of the actions that nullifies a person’s Islam, and makes them an apostate.

(Note 3) As Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala says:

“You who believe, be firm in being fair - as a witness for Allah - even though it is not to your own advantage, nor to the advantage of your kin, and whether the matter concerns the rich, or the poor. For Allah is the best protector (of all). Do not just follow your own desires, for you may deviate, and turn away, and Allah is always knowing of all that you do.” 4:135 Interpretation of Meaning

Submitted by a Mujahid

Theunjustmedia.com