Tajdeed

Bismillah – in the name of God

Hadith List:

Hadith 1: It has been narrated in Saĥīh Ibn Hibbān, as-Sufi told us in Baghdād, from Haytham Al-Khārijah, from Mudriq Ibn Sa’ad Fizāri (Abu Sa’eed), from Hayyan Ibn Abi Nadr, from Junāda Ibn Abi ‘Umayah who heard ‘Ubaydah Ibn ‘Osāma saying, “The Messenger of Allāh و عليه هللا صلى سلم told me, “O’ Ubaydah” who replied “Labbayk (I am respondent) Yā Rasūlullāh” who said “Listen and obey, in ease and in hardship, even if you dislike it and even if they give (others) preference over you, even if they take you money and beat your back, except if it is disobedience to Allāh in public”.

..

Hadith 2: “Should we not fight them?” The Messenger of Allāh سلم و عليه هللا صلى said, “No, as long as they pray”. It has been reported in the Sunan of Abu Dawūd;

…

Hadith 3: Told us Sulaymān Abu Dawūd, told us Hammad Ibn Zayd, from Hishām, from Hasan, from Adubbat Ibn Muĥ’sin, from ‘Umm Salamah the wife of the Messenger of Allāh سلم و عليه هللا صلى, she (r.a) said “There will be above you Imāms, some things (from them) you will accept and other things you will reject; whoever rejects with his tongue will be innocent, and whoever hates with his heart he will at least have escaped, but whoever follows and accepts!” It was said, “Should we not fight them?” The Messenger of Allāh سلم و عليه هللا صلى said, “No, as long as they pray”.

Abu Majid al-Dawsi: “This is the most balanced of the various Riwayāt of this narration, both in transmission and in wording, and this Hadīth is Saĥīh and can be located in the Saĥīh of Muslim and Musnad Ahmed, and also in the Sunan of both Abu Dawud at-Tayalisi and Abu Ya’la and Shaykh Hussein ‘Asad commented by saying Isnādan Saĥīh, and it is also in the Mu’jam of Tabarāni through many channels, and it can also be found in the Musnad of Abu ‘Uyayna, also in the Masāliĥ of Ibn Abi Shaybah and in the Musnad of Isĥāq Ibn Rāĥaway, it can also be found in the Tamĥeed of Ibn Abdul-Barr16in a number of ways.”

..

Abu Majid al-Dawsi: “the usage of the wording “Lā Mā Sallū” i.e. as long as they pray, is more likely to be a Kināyah or a Majāz (Metaphor/allegory). What gives strength and respect to this point view is clarified by the Hadīth of ‘Ubāda Ibn as-Sāmit (r.a) that speaks about the evident Kufr (buwah), it does not mention whether or not Salāh is established, and because the two narrations have to be understood together without creating any artificial contradictions, then it cannot be the case that the ruler who prays but violates the Deen in such a way that there is a Kufr Bowwaĥ cannot be a candidate for the Hadīth of ‘Ubāda Ibn as-Sāmit because the who performs the Kufr Bowwaĥ his prayers are not accepted so the Hadīth of ‘Ubāda would be legally applicable.”

I say: If we affirm the reading that the salah mentioned here is only confined to the ritual prayer and we reject the reading that the meaning of salah is extended to mean the Deen in its entirety, then the usage of the term kufr buwah would become reductant because all of kufr buwah would be confined to the ritual prayer (salah)! Yet, we know that kufr is not confined to the matter of ritual salah! For example, if the ruler completed the easy obligation, which is salah, yet he neglected or violated the laws of zakat, sadaqa, inheritance, riba’ etc, would that be imaan or would that also be kufr? Would such a clear kufr be tolerated and accepted by such people!?

If what our opponents claim is true, then why did Abu Bakr fight those who withheld Zakat from the Islamic government? Why was it named the Ridda’ (apostasy) wars? The reason is because a ruler abandoning both the Salah & the Zakat constitutes Kufr! Similarly, those who reject & oppose the system of God which calls obedience& absolute submission to the Creator is also kufr. Thus, those who rule with a system of other than Allah are Kafiroon, fasiqoon & Dhalimoon!

We need to bring the key Qur’anic verses into the light in order to understand these hadiths better.

“And whosoever does not rule by what Allah has revealed, such people are disbelievers (kafirun)” [Qur’an 5:44]

“…such people are oppressors (zalimun)” [Qur’an 5:45]

“…such people are deviators (fasiqun)” [Qur’an 5:47]

Therefore, Abdur-Rahman Hasan exposed the deviancy of his own Madkhali sect. On one hand, they are willing to takfir those who do not pray, or lead the prayer if they are authorities, yet they are inconsistent when it comes to other parts of the Islamic ruling system. They neglect the clear verse which says that those who do not rule with what Allah has revealed are kafiroon!

Then do they not reflect upon the Qur’an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction. [Qur’an 4:82]

As seen, they fall in clear contraction & misguidance.

They neglect the clear injunction of the hadith, which mentions that raising the sword against the ruler who shows any type of kufr buwah is permitted! And in other hadiths it is even obligated!

What does the Hadith of Thawban, Anas b. Malik & Umm Hani bint Abi Talib relay? The hadith states, “Be upright towards Quraysh, as long as they are with you but if not then put your swords on your back and eliminate them! If not, you will live like miserable farmers, eating from the toil of your hands!”. This hadith is documented in Majmu’ al-Zawa’id.& annihilate them! And if you do not, then you will be miserable farmers, eating from the

Moreover, our opponents insist that we can remove the “Muslim” ruler from power if he doesn’t lead the prayer, but we cannot remove him if he opens brothels, if he legalises prostitution, if he allows theft, interest, gambling, alcohol & killing!

What kind of joke is this?

How unjust, outrageous & oblivious are these people!? They try to misguide & fool the people, but they only trick themselves

Instead, if we analyse the texts clearly & bring them collectively, the hadith shows that the ruler is removed from power if he shows any type of kufr. Some may ask what is a clear kufr? The clear kufr is to abandon and violate any established injunction of the sharia.

To reiterate, to rule with a system of other than Allah is kufr buwah & it is a sufficient type of kufr to remove the Taghut from power

So, who is the Taghut?

Have you ˹O Prophet˺ not seen those who claim they believe in what has been revealed to you and what was revealed before you? They seek the judgment of false judges, which they were commanded to reject. And Satan ˹only˺ desires to lead them farther away. [Qur’an 4:60]

The Taghut is the rebel who exceeds the limits of God, he is the one who takes himself as a judge & lord besides Allah.  

So, how does he take himself a lord besides Allah?

He does this by ruling with other than what Allah rules. For instance, Allah commands one thing, yet he legislates another ruling in practice. Allah calls him to truth, & he goes towards falsehood. Allah says haram, he says halal, Allah says halal & he makes the halal haram.

Whereas Allah says, “The Hukm (Legislating, Commands, Judgment) is for none but Allah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him, that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not.” [Qur’an 12: 40]