Haitham Al-Haddad, originally from Saudi Arabia, is a London-based Islamic scholar. He is former Imam of Al-Muntada Al-Islami Trust in West London, a senior judge at the Islamic Sharia Council in Leyton, Chairperson and Operations Advisor for the Muslim Research and Development Foundation, a teacher at the Tayyibun Institute in Whitechapel, editor at Islam 21st Century and a lecturer at Sabeel.
- Muslims should disown and cut all ties with family members who leave Islam. Authorised
- Non-Muslim political systems are ‘filthy’.
- Suicide bombing is part of defensive jihad and therefore a ‘commandment’ of Islam. Those who condemn suicide bombing are committing a ‘betrayal’ and ‘serious treason.’
- Pro-active Jihad includes fighting non-Muslims to establish the law of Allah. This can be given the go-ahead once an Islamic state has been established, including in Britain.
- Those leaving Islam (even without attacking the religion) may be executed in an Islamic state.
- The ultimate aim of all Muslims is to see Islam governing the whole world. The world must not be governed by any other law than the law of Allah. The ‘Islamic Republic of Britain’ will only be possible if Muslims use the current political system to their advantage.
- It is a ‘must’ for all Muslims to establish hudood punishments.
- Jews and Christians should be ‘forced’ to pay the jizyah.
- Jews are the ‘descendants of apes and pigs’ and one of the ‘armies of the devil’. Money, media and alcohol are ‘weapons’ of the Jews.
- It is forbidden to join Christians in celebrating any of their festivals. To do so is worse than ‘committing suicide.’ Parents who encourage their children to join in are ‘evil.’
- A husband should not be questioned why he hits his wife.
- Extra-marital sex is punishable by stoning to death.
- Homosexual ‘activities’ are a criminal act and worse than murder. All Muslims believe homosexuality is a crime.
- There is no minimum age for teenage girls to get married. If Muslims are ‘careful of the legal issues’ and can avoid non-Islamic laws and not put themselves in trouble, marrying ‘the younger the better’ is advisable in Britain.
- Female circumcision is recommended.
- Women enjoy their husbands being superior to them and should obey them. If a husband orders his wife not to attend Islamic lectures or circles he ‘must’ be obeyed.
- Muslim women should attack ideas such as liberalism and freedom, and should not work. Women are recommended to cover their face and should not worry about integrating into wider society.
- The Japanese Tsunami was punishment for the Japanese people’s ‘lack of submission to Allah.’
“Do you think a Muslim just will eat haram food for nothing? He will eat haram food because he wants to avoid a bigger haram. So if some people would like to say we are voting for a kafir system, don’t say ‘We are voting for a kafir system.’ Don’t check, don’t ask a scholar that ‘Is it allowed to vote for a kafir system?’ He will say ‘Of course it’s not allowed.’ But tell him ‘Am I allowed to vote for a kafir system in order to avoid a bigger kafir system taking in power, taking power?
In this country it is impossible for us and it is, it is not even viable for us to carry weapons in order to change the system. We want to do that, and we will not do that, and we won’t be able to do that. Now tell me how can you achieve any change in this country?
So, dawah OK. Even when we say dawah, you do dawah, you do dawah, you do, and then what? You do what? It will not, we will not have an Islamic State immediately. You do dawah, you do dawah, you do dawah in this country, OK. Many people will become Muslim. Majority will become Muslim. Then they will say ‘Shall we allow our MPs to be non-Muslims and the majority are Muslims?’ So they will have their own Muslim MP. So you have participated in a democratic system.
You are going to have a Prime Minister who is a Muslim. How can a Prime Minister become a Muslim? Except through the democratic system, because still the Islamic State has not yet been established. So whether you like it or you don’t like it, the political participation is, or the political process is the scene to influence a change. I know it is filthy, OK? I know all the kuffar will go to hellfire. I know all the kuffar hate Muslims. I know all of these statements that many brothers are saying but in many cases you have to deal with it OK.
It is known to all that the US, which heads global infidelity and fighting Islam and Muslims, is the one who asked the Arab nations to cease with self sacrifice (suicide attacks) and pressured the Palestinian president to halt them. Without referring to the [religious] law regarding these actions, complying with these unjust demands by those who took it upon themselves to fight Islam and Muslims, our brethren, contains two major religious offenses: First of all, associating with the enemies of Allah, the Jews and the Christians. Secondly: assisting the infidels against the Muslims. It is known that each of these offenses is enough to extract [a Muslim] from the community [quotes of verses 51 and 52 of Surat Elmaáda].
Condemning these actions of self sacrifice and transforming them into terrorism and condemnable violence – regardless of the legal position on these actions, which are known to all to be the only means with which the Palestinians can resist the aggression directed at them and are the only form of defensive Jihad that the Muslims there [Palestine] have at their disposal – constitute of nullifying defensive Jihad. This is most serious because it means the nullification of one of the most serious commandments in this religion.
The Palestinian senior officials have committed serious treason when they prosecuted and then extradited the suspects in the murder of the Jewish minister (Rechavam Zeevi) and agreed to deport several Palestinians out of their land. This is because these actions constitute explicit recognition of the fact that the killing of Jews is a crime for which there are legal punishments. This betrayal is expounded when we see that they [the Palestinian officials] did not demand anything of the Israelis who killed Palestinian jihad warriors by assassination.
“[W]e must reflect on the reality of the conflict between us and the Jews, the enemies of God, and the descendants of apes and pigs.
O brothers! The conflict between us and the Jews is religious, historic, civilizational, and infinitely complex; it is not bounded by time or place, and it has more than one dimension.
Yes, o brothers, this is the nature of the conflict. It is not a military conflict for a limited period on the land of Palestine. The battle in Palestine, such as that underway at the moment and that which took place in the past, is but one small part of this conflict.
There is no better example of this, o brothers, than our recognition based on an investigation of reality, that although the Jews do not occupy all our land in Palestine, in time they will take over parts of the Arab countries indirectly in a manner perhaps worse than the military occupation. For example: political and economic control, and all their efforts to gain cultural control, as well as their hard work towards normalisation [of relations]. This is only part of their management of this battle, of which realise its importance and our ignorance.
We know that the Jews are using all that they can to end this conflict in their favour. They are doomed and will lose. They are one of the armies of the devil, of which Allah the Almighty said: And incite [to senselessness] whoever you can among them with your voice and assault them with your horses and foot soldiers and become a partner in their wealth and their children and promise them. But Satan does not promise them except delusion. [17:64]
Did Allah not commands us to seek refuge from the devils of mankind and the jinn? Indeed, the devils of mankind are perfectly represented by these Jews. Do their Protocols [of the Elders of Zion] not say: “We must seduce the world with women and wine, through gambling and recreation, and if this is not sufficient then their reality will testify to this.”
O brothers: their weapons in this battle are like the weapons of Satan: all kinds of desires, money, women, alcohol, games, media, so-called sports and art. All of these are amongst their weapons.”
“O servants of Allah! Here’s another warning more important than its predecessor, namely: declaring Jews and Christians to be kuffār, and the necessity of hating them, and avoiding them.“
“O Nation of Islam! The remaining provisions concerning the People of the Book are numerous: it is ḥarām [forbidden] to imitate them; it is essential to force them to pay the jizyah [discriminatory poll tax levied on non-Muslims] in Muslim countries; and to prohibit their residence in the Arabian Peninsula…but here I conclude with one rule, considering its importance to us these days, especially in this country, and in the face of this adversity, that is, the forbiddance of joining the Christians in their festivals, or congratulating them.
O servants of Allah! If we agree that their religion is an infidel religion, it means that their religious rites are a manifestation of infidelity and symbols of war against Allah and His Messenger, and there is no doubt that the festivals of each sect is associated with their religion and their faith, and it is these festivals which distinguish it from others, and the festivals are specifically distinguished by [non-Muslim] laws, just as Ibn Taymiyyah said.
So do you see that if a Muslim is pleased with the appearance of these manifestations of disbelief, as well as congratulating the non-Muslims on these festivals, let alone participating in them, that this is what makes congratulation of the kuffār on their religious rites categorically forbidden, and that the sin is multiplied if Muslims participate in these manifestations of disbelief?
Ibn al-Qayyim said: “As for congratulating non-Muslims on the rituals of disbelief, it is forbidden by consensus, just as it is forbidden to congratulate them on their festivals and fasts by saying ‘Merry Christmas to you!’ or ‘Enjoy your festival!’ and the like, for this equates to the speaker accepting disbelief and it is forbidden.” It has the same status as congratulating someone for prostrating in front of the Cross. This is the greatest sin to Allah and more odious than celebrating by drinking wine, committing suicide and practising illegal sexual intercourse and the like. Many of those who have no respect for their religion fall in this trap and they do not know the ugliness of what they have done, for whosoever congratulated someone for a sin or heresy or disbelief exposes himself to the loathing of Allah and his indignation.
Allah said: “And it has already been revealed to you in the Book (this Quran) that when you hear the Verses of Allah being denied and mocked at, then sit not with them, until they engage in a talk other than that; (but if you stayed with them) certainly in that case you would be like them. Surely, Allah will collect the hypocrites and disbelievers all together in Hell.”[4:140]
O servants of Allah, Ibn Taymiyyah said: “It is also evil to encourage Muslim children to respect or love these festivals of disbelief…”
What an evil parent you are if you don’t forbid your family and your children from that and knowledge of it: that it is not permissible for us to participate in the Christian festivals or imitate them.
O servants of Allah! I do not know how it can be pleasurable for a believer to congratulate the cross-worshipers,the swine-eaters, the wine-drinkers, on their festivals of immorality, obscenity and adultery, where naked women dance with men, where cups of wine are passed round, noisy songs are sung, shamelessness and depravity abound, and then tell them after that, ‘ Have a happy time!’”
“The jihad was allowed also through stages and then the final stage is to fight everyone until they establish the law of Allah. The first stage after migrating to Medina the Prophet was allowed, allowed to fight those who fought against him. Then the Prophet was commanded to fight those who fought against him. Then the Prophet, and that is the final stage as Ibn Qayyim said, and this I think all scholars agree on this, the Prophet were commanded to fight everyone until they established the law of Allah.
‘Fight them until they establish the deen of Allah’ or ‘until’ sorry, ‘fight them until the deen of Allah is established’. Now, the Prophet was commanded to do that when he established the Islamic State. Before establishing the Islamic State the Prophet was commanded to uphold and not to fight. Even in some cases not to fight back. And this is the steps that we need to follow, especially Muslims in the West. Muslims in the West are commanded not to fight, not to fight to establish the deen of Allah. It is not our job to do that and even if we do that while we are minorities then we are going against the sunnah of the Prophet. And this has to be made clear. If we use violence in the West while we are minorities to establish the deen of Allah then we are going against the sunnah of the Prophet and, as many scholars said, that we are actually committing sins, rather than committing or making good deeds. Why? Again because we said that the Prophet, when he went to Mecca he was spreading Islam, he was spreading tawheed. And then the next stage was that the people themselves, especially the dignitarians, when they accept Islam of course they will change the system and they will call for Islam to be established. So here we should do the same thing. We should call people to tawheed and then once there is a substancial amount of people, considerable amount of people who can make a change in this country without shedding the blood of people, once those people accept Islam and they can establish, they can make a change then and then only we can establish the deen of Allah in this country according to the meaning that we have mentioned.”
“Now the question is ‘So when do we establish jihad? When do we fight?’ This type of fighting which is called the ‘jihad al-talab’ which is wrongly translated as offensive jihad and it should be translated as pro-active jihad, this is better than offensive jihad. This pro-active jihad is carried out by the Islamic State, once there is The Islamic state, not ‘a’, ‘an’ Islamic state, not ‘any’ Islamic state, The Islamic State which is the Khilafah established, then that Khilafah can establish jihad because that type of jihad is not for individuals.”
Osama bin Laden
Whatever the case may be, Osama left this worldly life to meet his Lord who is the ultimate judge. Almighty Allah knows everything about him, his actions, and the conspiracies that surround his life. He knows what Osama did, what he didn’t do, and what we were made to believe that he did. In any case, he died as a Muslim and it is an established part of our Islamic creed that every Muslim, unlike the disbelievers, will eventually enter paradise. According to a number of scholars, the Muslim killed by the enemies of Islam is considered a martyr, regardless of whether he died during combat or simply in a state of non-combative military engagement such as being killed whilst sleeping. Other scholars limit the title of martyr only to those Muslims who are killed during active combat. Whatever the case may be, all scholars have agreed that mistakes made by a Muslim fighter in combat do not deprive him of his rights, whether it be the right of regarding him a martyr or any other Islamic right.
Delwar Hossain Sayeedi
“…now they are, as puppets for India, promoting secularism, atheism, within that country [Bangladesh] and they had, they had a group called the Shabagh group, and the bloggers of the Shabagh group recently have written some nasty blogs, comments, statements about Islam, about Muhammad (), about Allah (). And one of the bloggers written after they passed a sentence to hang one of the great Bangladeshi leaders, known as Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, they passed a statement to hang him just last week or two weeks ago, one of the brothers said ‘Oh, people are angry and they say that Allah will help them.’
“A man should not be questioned why he hit his wife because this is something between them. Leave them alone. They can sort out their matters among themselves. Even the father of the daughter who is married to the man, he should not ask his daughter why you have been beaten or hit by your husband.”
“They completely ignored the specific adillah (proof) that talk about hadd al-ridah (apostasy) as hadd (punishment) for those who apostate just for apostasy, just for changing their religion from al-Islam to kufr, OK? To other religion other than Islam, just because of that. Actually, I found a statement, amazing statement from Shaykh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah where he said that during that time, those who used to apostate they were not committing an act of treason. They just apostate, because the Islamic State at that time was so strong they can not commit anything against the Islamic state. So they were killed just because they apostate.”
“Capital punishment in Islamic law is permissible…for those designated as ‘innocent’ according to international law such as the one who leaves his religion…just as the married adulterer, is a ‘criminal eligible for the death penalty’, according to the Islamic legal principle of consensus.
And this reminds us, o Servants of Allah, of the stories of those who compose heretical writings, that you cannot tolerate esoteric interpretation, you rule on their apostasy and desertion of the religion…in the West they are known as creative writers, and are considered as amongst the most innocent, but to us they are apostates, and their blood is halal.”
“And some of them, I don’t know whether you know or not, some of them already rejected Islam, yeah? They already said that ‘Well, Islam or non-Islam is same, is almost the same.’ So this is a clear rejection of Islam to say that Islam or non-Islam, they are the same. This is clearly a clear rejection of Islam. And those people, they should be really advised that they should think about the matter again because if they are insisting on this it means they have rejected Islam. Rejection Islam, or rejecting Islam in this way, it means kufr. And they should see, and I advise them, or I advise them to go and to sit before a reputable body to judge whether they are still Muslims or not. This is a serious matter. And if they have left the fold of al-Islam then they need to repent to Allah () and they need to enter al-Islam again. If they are insisting on whatever they have decided, and then a proper Islamic body should decide whether they are still Muslims or not. If they have rejected al-Islam it is up to them, yeah? Allah says (Arabic) ‘the hellfire is waiting for anyone who is rejecting Allah and his messenger.’ It’s up to them, we can’t do anything about it. Moreover, their families, it will be haram for them, if it has been established that they have left the fold of Islam and they can not be considered as Muslims, if their families…if their spouses are considering themselves as Muslims, then they should not continue having any kind of relationship with them because it is haram to have a relationship with a person who denounced his deen, his religion, denounced al-Islam.
And no one should say ‘Oh Allah forgive so and so’ because Allah () says to Muhammad () what? (Arabic) ‘Don’t even seek forgiveness for them, don’t pray on them.’ So we should not pray janazah on them, we should not make (?) on them if it was confirmed that they have rejected al-Islam. The matter is serious because no one should, from now on we should really take a stance and no one claims that he is a Muslim, and proud to have the name of Muhammad or whatever name, and attributes himself to al-Islam and then he messes around with al-Islam.
…a proper body is authorised by Allah to give rulings and these are the people of knowledge. Allah authorised them (Arabic) so they have what? Authority. So, it can, no one can say ‘No one can take me out of the fold of al-Islam’ yeah? No, that is not true, this is not true, this is a deception my dear respected brothers and sisters. If a person commits something, rejects something from al-Islam he should check with a proper Islamic body and that body has the right to what? To announce kufr upon him or her. So the matter is serious. And no one can say ‘No, no one can, OK, judge on me’ yeah? No, no, this is a deception. Islamic bodies can judge on certain cases, Islamic authorities or Islamic scholars can decide on some things, can judge on certain people, OK?
“The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with stripes, let not compassion move you in neither case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day and let a party of the Believers, some Believers to witness their punishment. Ibn Qayyim has really beautiful explanation for this ayah. He said Allah has made the penal laws related to adultery and fornication this thing in three ways from this ayah. First of all he said the penalty of death for it, whenever applicable, is done in the harshest manner possible. Which is what? Stoning. Then Allah has forbid his slaves to be of merciful, to be merciful with those who commit adultery.”
“Brothers don’t be surprised, I was sitting with some (?) from America one time and they were discussing the hadd of al-rajm, stoning. See how the level of inferiority complex that we have reached to, Muslims in the West? They have reached to a great level of this inferiority complex. If they say that we can accept the capital punishment but we have to question stoning the adulterers, why people in the West here they don’t accept the capital punishment? They don’t accept it, they think it is against the human rights OK? But in America they accept it, why? What is the difference? Because in America the capital punishment is practiced. So therefore the yardstick is what? The yardstick to accept whether this is acceptable from an Islamic point of view, or it is not acceptable is what? (Audience: “culture?”) Uh? Not only culture, the Western value, OK? If it is accepted by the West then we can understand and it does make sense. If it is not accepted by the West then it doesn’t make sense. So therefore they said ‘we, capital punishment’, I was sitting with them, they said ‘capital punishment it does make sense but stoning we have to look at it’, OK? ‘We have to consider what is the aim of sharia behind stoning’, OK? And this is an example of people misusing this issue of aim and objective of sharia.”
“Who is going to put a system to stop fornication? Or to lash those who fornicate? Who can put a legislation to stone the adulterers and the adulterer? Who can do that? It is the lawmakers. Those who can do that are the people in charge. Those who are having power. Those people they can establish the Islamic system in it’s totality.”
“We are commanded to stone the adulterers. Is that true or not? How can we establish that rule if we are not having an Islamic system? Agree? Do you agree on this or not? That’s why you tell people those who deny that this is the aim, you tell them ‘Is establishing these punishments, this hudood, is it a must on us or not?’ Forget about Muslims in the West, is it a must, is it an obligation upon Muslims to establish the hudood? They will say yes. No one can negate that.”
“Now they want to define marriage between the same sex. A man to get married to a man and a woman to get married to a woman. Ibn Qayyim Ibn Qayyim Rehmatullah Alaih, look at this, he said (Arabic) the homosexual activities is one of the most evil sins that Allah (jalla wa ala) hates the most. And he said that, after shirk, this homosexual activity might be the second biggest sin. Even he said it might be worse than a murder, this homosexual activities.”
“Some absurdly argue that homosexual inclinations are inherited through one’s genetics. However ridiculous such a claim may be, even if accepted for the argument’s sake, it still does not justify the criminal act.
As we see in the verse, the primary evil of Prophet Lot’s fellow citizens was that they practised homosexuality, defined in the verse as a criminal act whereby the perpetrator engages in sexual acts with a member of the same sex.
In order to combat the scourge of homosexuality Allah has ordained us to speak out, and that we should co-operate with others in righteousness and God-consciousness.
We also appreciate the brave stance of the Nobel peace prize winner and president of Liberia, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, in defending a law that criminalises homosexual acts and determinedly standing for higher moral standards.
It is one thing to give equal rights to different communities so as to reflect our diverse and multicultural society, and quite another to afford a criminal act (according to the fundamentals of all faiths) the same legitimacy as an extremely natural and godly method of seeking union with a member of the opposite sex.”
“We have limits.We cannot drink alcohol. We cannot leave our hijab. We cannot allow Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men. I’m taking about basic principles that no Muslim can go against. No Muslim can say well we, yes we need to go in the pubs and drink alcohol. We cannot commit adultery and zina, we cannot be involved in that leave alone being involved in homosexual activities.
When the issue of homosexuality came, what do we do about it? ‘Al-amr bi’l-ma’ruf wa’l-nahy ‘an al-munkar’ – you should enjoin the good or, and forbid the evil…or Allah is about to send upon you adhab. Send upon you all adhab if you stop enjoining the good and forbidding the evil.
Even those people who try to water down the issue of homosexuality from an Islamic point of view, ask them internally what do you believe about homosexuality? They believe that it is a crime. All Muslims believe in this.”
“Now in England yeah, and many other European countries homosexuality was considered to be a mental illness maybe fifty years ago, and then it used to be illegal. OK, someone might say that ‘at that time we were wrong and now we are right’. OK now we are right. Can you give me an assurance that we will continue like this after fifty years, still believing in the same issue with regards to homosexuality, that it is something natural, it is genetic, it is good? Can you assure for me that we will continue in this belief? No one can assure for that. So, if there is no assurance and this is not a set of value that came from the creator then it is open for debate. It is open for a change, so why don’t we…”
Interviewer: “But is it your suggestion to go back to maybe to where we were fifty years ago then? Is it your belief that it is a mental illness? Is that what you want to reach in the debate?”
“This is the debate that I’m calling for. Fifty years ago OK, this set of value OK, or this piece of value was like this. Whether that is better for our situation now or not, this is what I’m calling for.”
“According to such thought processes, it is lunacy to deem homosexuality a crime against humanity yet it is good judgment and tolerance to accept men in a homosexual relationship adopting a child and depriving him/her of the kindness and feminine qualities of a mother that a man can never satisfy.”
Man: “What age should the teenager girls get married? Or is it…”
Haddad: “Should get what?”
Man: “Get married.”
Man: “Is it a family decision or is…”
Haddad: “It’s a family decision.”
Man: “Is there a particular age from Islamic…?”
Haddad: “No, there’s no particular…”
Man: “Thirteen? Fourteen? No?”
Haddad: “No particular age from an Islamic perspective. But, as you know, the earlier is the better, especially for girls. But you have to be careful of the legal, yaani, issues.”
Man: “Legal issue?”
Man: “Is it from the rule of the land or…”
Haddad: “Not necessarily. There are many, yanni, laws in the country here, that are anti-Islamic, not Muslims’, not Islamic laws (?) No. So, if there is a way, er…just, yaani, to live and avoiding those anti-Islamic laws then, and provided that you don’t put yourself into troubles yeah? You should go for that choice. What can you do? Yep?”
Man: “Preference would be?”
Haddad: “Yaani, normally the younger is the better.”
Haddad: “The younger is the better, but you have to, yaani, by take into consideration the legal side.”
Haddad: “Of course, as Muslims, we believe that this co-existence cannot take place unless they are living under the umbrella of al-Islam, under the system of al-Islam. But brother Jamil and brothers, we have to differentiate between a situation of a necessity that we are dealing with and the ultimate aim in an ideal situation. Now we are talking about minorities living in the West so we have to provide them with workable solutions in the short run. And as we said, these visions and strategies are meant to be for a short run, means within fifty years, something like this. It is not the far ultimate aim of Muslims because the far ultimate aim for Muslims is to have Islam governing the whole world, Islamisation of the whole globe. This is the ultimate aim of any Muslim and of all communities, Muslim communities. But we are not talking about that at the moment, we are talking about the immediate goals. So, in terms of immediate goals we need this peaceful co-existence and they claim that they are promoting it and we need to take it from there. And we need to tell them that this peaceful co-existence, in order to have real peaceful co-existence, then we have to talk about real multiculturalism, we have to talk about real pluralism. And you said, if you remember in the previous episode, the discussion that many people have, which is yes, you are calling for multiculturalism means Islam to be officially recognised as a religion in all these European countries and Muslim needs are fulfilled officially within these countries.”
>insert hypocritical statement from Haddad on Muslims’ needs in the West verses Westerners’ needs in Saudi Arabia<
Jamil Rashid: “So, this is what I was going to return to, this is what see, this is what a lot of the so-called skeptics say see. They say that what Shaykh Haitham, what you’re saying is what the aims of this multiculturalism is, which is for Islam to take over. Because Islam now, you’re asking now, you’re saying that ‘Look the problem is that we need to find out what’s actually better for society as a whole.’ So really you’re calling to society to accept Islam, so really this is disguised as multiculturalism. Really it’s not about multiculturalism, it’s about getting Islam into the door. What do you say to that kind of…?”
Haddad: “Even if we say that, what’s wrong with that? Because this is our aim at the end of the day, and I don’t want to react as so many Muslims reacted towards the issue of integration when they had this attack. They said ‘No, no, no we are integrated.’ I don’t want to say ‘No, no, no we are not going to take over.’ Our ultimate aim is not a matter of taking over using this terminology, our ultimate aim as Muslims is to have, to see Islam spreading all over the world and to see the word of Allah dominant on the whole globe, because justice will never be achieved unless the word of Allah is dominant. This is very simple. Allah says in the Quran (Islamic quote). So people need to achieve justice. (Islamic quote) means the revelation…So it means that the ultimate goal of every single message is to achieve justice. Without revelation there will be no justice.That’s why we can say clearly yes, our end ultimate goal is this. However we are not talking about our end ultimate goal because we as Muslims are not ready for it.”
“Now dawah takes many forms. One of the key principles of dawah is to make the kalima of Allah, the law of Allah, the shariah of Allah and the deen of Allah prevalent and superior to any other law. And this, any kind of action or any kind of activities that helps to make the law of Allah superior to any other law it is considered to be jihad and it is considered to be among the most righteous deeds a person can be involved with or in. And that’s why such lectures, although they are not spiritual lectures but they are intellectual lectures, but they help us in order to do dawah in facing these challenges and help us to understand how to make the deen of Allah superior to any other religion. Now once we say the deen of Allah is superior over any other religion, it is the deen of the creator, it is the law of the creator, it is not my law, it is not the Muslims’ law, it is not the shariah law, it is the law of Allah. And the law of Allah has chosen al-Islam for that law in the (?) as he said. So he is the one who chosen the name al-Islam. He is the one who chosen the name al-shariah for this law, and that’s why we want al Islam to be superior to any other religion. And Allah says in the Quran in three ayat (Arabic) in one ayah, (Arabic) in the other ayah (Arabic) he is the one who sent Muhammad (saw) with the guidance and the true religion in order to make that religion above any other religion, superior to any other religion. And that is our responsibility brothers and sisters. And that is the main jihad for us at this point of time.”
“Establishing the deen of Allah, brothers and sisters, it means to make sure that the law of Allah, the religion of Allah is dominant, is prevalent. Where? In the whole world. It means to make sure that the deen of Allah is superior above any other deen. The law of Allah is superior to any other system. And to make sure that the whole world is not governed by any system other than the system of Allah, is not ruled by any ruling, by any law other than the law of Allah. This is what establishing the deen means. Any law other than the law of Allah is invalid. Any system other than the system of Allah is invalid. Any commandments other than the commandments of Allah are to be considered invalid.”
“Let me ask you a question, just a simple question. In Britain, yeah? It is a non-Muslim country, within ten years, twenty years it will not be a Muslim country. It will not be the Islamic Republic of Britain yeah? It’s true now we have the Islamic Republic of Tower Hamlets yeah? But we still have a long way to be the Islamic Republic of Britain. Even if it becomes the Islamic Republic of Britain, when it will become the Islamic Republic of Britain we will have the MPs Muslims and the PM, Prime Minister, Muslim. How did they become MPs and PM? Yanni, imagine that is what we aim before Khilafa, just before Khilafa. Khilafa will not just happen all of a sudden. We have to prepare for it. It is a long time when it will happen. Until then it will become, let us imagine an Islamic state, Britain will become an Islamic state, let us imagine this. How is it going to become an Islamic state? Means the Prime Minister will be a Muslim. So how will he be a Muslim? So at one point you will say Muslims should be MPs and PM. On a long term how can the change takes place? In European countries the change takes place through so-called democratic process whether we like it or we don’t like it, we hate it.”
“This peaceful co-existence and just full stop is wrong. Peaceful co-existence and enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. Peaceful co-existence and spreading the dawah. Peaceful co-existence and working towards (Islamic quote) establishing justice in the whole world. And we know for a fact that justice cannot be established except when the law of Allah is dominant in the world. So we cannot say that peaceful co-existence full stop without spreading dawah, without working towards that goal, which is establishing the deen of Allah is a legitimate goal, is a legitimate aim for Muslims living in the West. So what should be the aim of Muslims living in the West? Or what should be the aim of Muslims living in the West? It’s to work towards establishing the deen of Allah in the whole world, and in the West as part of the whole world.”
“So what should be the aim of Muslims living in the West? Or what should be the aim of Muslims living in the West? It’s to work towards establishing the deen of Allah in the whole world, and in the West as part of the whole world. And any aim, brothers and sisters, any aim against that aim is contradicting what all the scholars have said. And even I know some contemporary scholars may not say this but if you discuss it with them they will agree that this should be the aim because they cannot because they cannot go against what all the scholars from the past have agreed. They cannot go against the numerous textual proofs that we have mentioned. And it is true that some scholars they are not explicit in declaring this as an aim but they recognised internally that this is the aim. And as I say to you no one can go against it. And it is true that some of our (?), some of them, they understood that this is the aim but they say ‘It is not the time to be so open in declaring that as an aim’. And I agree that it might not be the time to declare that as the aim but because unfortunately because some other (?) started to negate that as an aim then some (?) clearly has to say that ‘Listen, enough is enough. This is our aim and no one can go against that aim.’ I hope that this point is clear. So the ultimate aim for any Muslim, for Muslims living in the West, for Muslims living in China, for Muslims living in India, for Muslims living in Saudi Arabia, for Muslims living in Alaska is what? To establish the deen of Allah. To establish the deen of Allah in their areas and in the whole world, globally and work towards that. Now we as Muslims in the West, yes this is our aim, however we differ in terms of achieving that aim. Many of us have taken different routes but I guess many of them they are looking for that aim. And even if some non-Muslims have heard this we are telling them clearly, any sincere Muslim, ANY Muslim believes that Quran is superior. Is that true? Have you seen any Muslim who said that Quran is not superior?
The one who believes in contrary to that, the one who doesn’t believe that Quran is superior, he is kafir, he has left the fold of Islam by consensus, no one can compromise on this. So if you believe that Quran is superior then you believe that adultery and fornication is haram, is a crime. So you don’t belive that ‘Well I believe that adultery and fornication is haram and some other people believe that adultery and fornication is OK, it is up to them, internally I believe that they are committing a crime’. Although some people might not openly say THAT. Did you get this point? Internally they believe that they are committing a crime. Even those people who try to water down the issue of homosexuality from an Islamic point of view, ask them internally what do you believe about homosexuality? They believe that it is a crime. All Muslims believe in this. Why? Because this is condemned clearly in the Quran and they believe that the legislation of the Quran is superior. So eventually all Muslims believe that the Quran should be the system that governs the whole world. Eventually, whether they said that, or they have not said that, all of them believe that Quran is the best system to rule the whole world, and therefore if it is the best system to rule the whole world it should be the only system to rule the world because we should choose the best system to rule the world. OK? So as I say, the ultimate aim of ALL Muslims should be to establish the deen of Allah, but we differ in the methodologies that we are following to establish the deen of Allah. OK, so far we have spoken about the definition of establishing the deen, the importance of understanding this principle and the textual evidences as well as the rational evidences behind establishing the deen as an aim for all Muslims. And then from that we have also spoken about having this as an aim for Muslims in the West. I hope that is clear.
The aim that is an obligation upon us is to establish the deen of Allah. Establish the deen of Allah in the globe and the West. At least working towards that aim. We also said that ALL Muslims believe that the deen of Allah is superior, although many of them are not so explicit and open in declaring that clearly and therefore many of them are not very explicit in saying that establishing the deen of Allah should be the aim of Muslims living in the West. However, if you do question them you find that they believe internally in this principle. That was the first part of the lecture. The second part of the lecture we will talk about the steps towards establishing the deen of Allah in the whole world and in the West as part of the whole world.”
“What was his (Muhammad) aim? Was it just to give dawah to people so will accept Islam? And then after accepting Islam what? What will happen? No the aim of the prophet is to establish the deen of Allah as we mentioned. Means the aim of the prophet is to make sure that the system ruling in Mecca and elsewhere is the system of Allah, is the law of Allah, is the deen of Allah. That was his aim.
So it was clear that the prophet was aiming and targeting the leaders. But he was not targeting them to convince them that the best system is Islam. First of all they have to accept Islam themselves, and moreover the second evidence, which is very clear evidence, when the prophet used to present his dawah to the tribes who used to come to Mecca for haj, for pilgrimage, he used to tell them ‘Many we need’ (Islamic quote) ‘who is endorsing me so I can spread the word of Allah’. Means he wants a system, he wants a country to endorse him so that country becomes a Muslim country, so that Muslim country can spread Islam. And when the prophet migrated to Medina, after a group of dignitarians from Medina accepted his dawah, he went to Medina as what? He went as a leader, as the leader of Medina. And Medina by consensus of the scholars is the first Islamic state. So he went to a state. So he was interested to establish Islam in a state, on a State level. And this is the meaning of ‘La illi la Allah’ – establish Islam on an individual level, not only that but establish Islam on a state level. OK so that’s why that was clear in the mind of the prophet, and as I said brothers, no one can go against that because we are commanded to stone the adulterers. Is that true or not? How can we establish that rule if we are not having an Islamic system? Agree? Do you agree on this or not? That’s why you tell people those who deny that this is the aim, you tell them ‘Is establishing these punishments, this hudood, is it a must on us or not? Forget about Muslims in the West. Is it a must, is it an obligation upon Muslims to establish the hudood? They will say yes. No one can negate that. How can we establish the hudood if we do not have Islamic states? Is the question clear? So we have to have Islamic states in order to establish the hudood. So our ultimate aim is to have an Islamic state. Means our ultimate aim is to have the law of Allah dominant, the system of Allah dominant. And our aim is to see the law of Allah superior to any other law so we can establish the other parts of our religion. That’s why the prophet was aiming for that. And the prophet did not establish those hudood except when he went to Medina, to that Islamic state. So this is the aim of the prophet.
Either after the migration to Medina, or just before that, and as we said most of the scholars believe that he was commanded to fight back after migration to Medina. Means once the Islamic state was established then the jihad was allowed. The jihad was also allowed though stages and then the final stage is to fight everyone until they establish the law of Allah. The first stage after migrating to Medina the prophet was allowed, allowed to fight those who fought against him. Then the prophet was commanded to fight those who fought against him.” (continued in part 9 below)
“Until then the full establishment of the deen of Allah cannot take place and we are obliged to work towards that, to work towards that. I hope that is clear. And whatever we can establish from the deen of Allah in this country or in the West peacefully we have to do so. So for example if they say in the West ‘It is up to you as Muslims among yourselves to for example to establish the hudood, and it is up to you as Muslims if you want to cut the hands of the thieves’ let us imagine that THEN we should take the matter seriously and we should think about it and think about the consequences and maybe we can take this and establish it. It might be an obligation upon us to establish it. So the steps is to spread tawheed among people, and to try, this is the first point. The second point is try to establish as much as we can from our religion in the West, from our system, from our way of life in the West. This is the second step. In all spheres of life, peacefully as we said. And it is up to them to accept it or not to accept it. And then if we go by those, if we do those two steps simultaneously, in tandem with each other then we will reach to a point either they will say ‘Enough is enough and we will not accept any more advancement of your religion’ and they might say ‘Enough is enough we will not accept any more people to accept Islam, we have to put an end to that’ or we reach to a point where many people have accepted Islam and many people have seen the benefits of shariah and Islam and they will call for Islam to be established in its totality, including hudood. This is briefly the aim and the steps that we need to take in order to establish the deen of Allah in the West.”
“The sunnah way of doing it, the proper way of doing it, it is the consensus of all the scholars that female circumcision is a sunnah. I haven’t come across any scholar who said it clearly that it is not sunnah. All of them they said that it is sunnah, in fact some scholars say it is wajeb (obligatory).”
Haddad quotes various hadiths that would claim female circumcision is a “virtue” or an “honour” for women, or that it is “likely to give chastity for the private part and is better for the husband”.
He follows on with: “As we said all of the scholars agree that it is sunnah….recommended from sharia. So we have to be careful, to say that it is against human rights, women’s rights – we have to be careful of that statement.”
“The husband, OK it is his duty to provide for his wife even if she works, if he is allowing her to work, OK?.
By nature women they like to see their husbands as shelters, as providers, as protectors. This is the nature of women, this is the nature of females.
She needs to feel that her husband around her is a protector for her. Even she enjoys him being superior to her. Don’t listen to those who are trying to make it upside down and trying to influence women. They don’t accept the superiority of the husband or the male over you. This is wrong. This is not true. The nature of women, they enjoy it.
The husband, he doesn’t look that this is my wife, and by nature she is a female, she makes mistakes that I, me as a man don’t make…I should be tolerant to the mistakes or shortcomings or her needs.
This is my advice to women that are listening to this, don’t work. It is the responsibility of your husband to work. Your responsibility is to enjoy your life at home, OK?
One of the biggest problems is the wife do not obey their husbands. Because of this feminism, because of being independent etc. etc, women don’t like to obey their husbands…some practicing sisters, they are not realising that they should obey their husbands. I receive so many questions from practicing sisters saying that ‘Well if my husband doesn’t allow me to attend lectures or circles, am I allowed to obey him?’ Yes of course you are allowed. You MUST obey him.
We tell her ‘OK sister, the first right is the right of your husband’.
Unfortunately what we see is women, they want to be independent and they don’t want to obey their husband.”
“Forget about the word ‘force’, the word ‘force’ might have a negative connotation, but do I encourage them to wear niqab? Sometimes if I can even force them to wear niqab, yes I do that. But just to say we are not forced, or I don’t force, or I don’t command or I don’t encourage my women or my wife or my daughter to wear niqab – that is not an accurate answer.“
“Whatever the creator legislates for us is better for the whole of humanity. It is not only better for Muslims, but it is better for Muslims and non-Muslims alike – for everyone. And therefore they pose another question, ’Do you like to see all women wear this burqa or this niqab?’, this is another question that they pose, which is ’Do you like to see all Western women, all non-Muslim women, all women in this society covering their faces and wearing the burqa?’
The right answer is to say no we want all human beings, all Western women to follow the guidelines of their creator, not only in this issue of covering the face, but they have to submit to the will of their creator. Once they submit to the will of their creator then the whole perception about life and why they are living will have a different meaning. And once they submit to that and they understand the purpose of life, then by themselves they will choose to wear niqab.
“The non-Muslims are attacking Muslims from different angles. The worst attack and the most severe attack and the most dangerous attack is the ideological attack. Many non-Muslims are attacking Muslims from the angle of the role of women in society.
The main role of any sister is different from the role of any brother or of the male. I’d like to stress on this point because so many sisters are confused, and because of the notion of equality between the two genders that the West is promoting many sisters are influenced by that and they think that any role that is given to men should be given to women.
We need sisters to articulate their ideas about the position of women in Islam. We need sisters to defend Islamic principles such as Hijab. We need sisters to even attack some of the non-Islamic ideas such as maybe freedom, liberalism, nudity and these things.”
Haddad: “We have this Egyptian story, I’m not quite sure whether it is true or not, that a man with his wife, they are already married, went into the train and opposite them another man came and he sat opposite them. And the man was not having his wife covered properly, so that man he started to look at her, to the level that he embarrassed her. So her husband of course became angry. So that man told the man who is looking at his wife ‘Just stop it’. He said ‘Why?’ He said ‘This is my wife’ He said ‘But you are displaying it for me.’
Co-panelist: “He should have prevented her from doing it.”
Haddad: “OK, yeah. ‘You are displaying her for me. So let me enjoy it’”
Interviewer: “But it’s a reality.”
Haddad: “It is a reality. People are trying to disprove that. Anyway at the time of fitna, for example a woman coming to a situation where it is all men, then all the scholars says that at that point she has to cover, at the time of fitna, if the woman is attractive.”
Haddad: “What we mean by niqab is covering the face of females who reach the age of puberty infront of non-mahrams. So we are talking about covering the female face in front of non-mahram men if she is above the age of puberty.”
“The Western governments they are not against niqab because it is covering the face. As I say they are against niqab because it is a manifestation of a different religion or different culture taking place and moreover because it is a manifestation of a different lifestyle for women, and they have this problem against women…..because of the problem of the Suffragettes and womens rights before, OK, historical issues, so they are very sensitive with regards to anything related to women. And that’s why they started with this. So let us understand the whole concept that it is just resisting the visibility of Islam.”
“I always advise sisters, married sisters not to work. The minute you work, the minute you spoil your matrimonial life, full stop. Unfortunately, men when they see their women working they become lazy. They like to depend on them, they don’t keep a job, they don’t sacrifice. This is our nature as men. This is one of our deficiencies. So don’t give this chance to men, they will abuse that chance. And what they will do, you will be going working from nine to five, yes? What will happen? He will not keep a job, he will start looking for jobs, and he will spend a long time in front of the internet and he might get into haram. Then he might see you ageing quickly, distressed, and he will think of another wife, he will think of OK another marriage and all of these problems. These are real problems. We see them in this society. Don’t listen to those who say oh no, no this is your future, your career etc.
So generally speaking, and I’m not afraid, I know that they will label me as maybe extremist, or OK backward or whatever yep? But I don’t care because I know that this is something that we need to provide for the whole society. The whole society is collapsing.”
“Recently, I attended a major Islamic event, at the end of which there was an ‘Islamic concert’. I remained behind for a few minutes in order to observe; I could not believe what was being done in the name of Islam! Members of the opposite sex where freely mixing, so much so that they were sitting next each other and their thighs were touching.
Furthermore, music may be a weapon, but a counterproductive one, for embedded within it is a culture of permissiveness and liberalism.
It is sad to witness respected Muslim figures speaking about music and its permissibility and citing examples of the music played at the beginning of news programs or what is is heard unintentionally in the street.
Once the ‘Islamic’ music began, the audience began to clap and their bodies to shake in their chairs. I decided to leave disgusted at what I had observed and met another brother who had also entered the hall with the intention to examine the ongoing of such concerts; he was surprised that I had departed so early on though the concert had not properly began.
Our ummah is calling out to us to produce genuine men and women who can meet the hardships it faces and provide a future with hope and optimism for the establishment of servitude to Allah and welfare of our brothers and sisters; this cannot be achieved through fads and mere dreams of betterment and through incapacitating our youth via the escapism and harmful effects of music: a matter out-rightly rejected and deemed impermissible throughout our fourteen hundred year history.”
“Sisters, I highly recommend that all sisters wear niqab in this country, forget about whether it is obligatory or not.
If we say so what? Yes it (niqab) is against integration. So what? Why do we need to say ‘no it is not against integration?’ And as long as you are not breaking the law and causing violence and civil disorder, so what? I don’t want to integrate with you. As simple as that.”
“A typical example of such deception is the debate that took place a while ago around a woman assuming the role of an imam and leading men in prayer; unfortunately, a number of scholars and students started to discuss the ruling on this matter purely from a juristic point of view when it was sufficient to raise awareness to the consensus or the overwhelming agreement of scholars throughout Islamic history on this. During this hot debate, many were oblivious to the dangerous agenda behind this action and the movement to support it.”
Reasons Behind the Japanese Tsunami
Of course, we might ask: but what did the Japanese do? They have never fought the believers – the state has formally renounced war as a sovereign right and bans settlement of international disputes through the use of force.
Many people assume that Allah only punishes people when they commit injustices towards others, yet Muslims must refrain from being so self-absorbed; Allah created mankind so that they may worship Him in line with His monotheistic nature, and deviancy from such a clear purpose only serves to anger the Most High. It is true that Japan is not like the US or many of its allies in that it refrains from waging direct war against others, yet their failure was the lack of submission to Allah and refusing to admit that all of the favours they are blessed with are given to them by their Creator. Japan has the world’s third-largest economy and is the world’s fourth largest exporter and fifth largest importer. Japan is also a leading nation in technology, machinery, biomedical research, and fundamental scientific research, having produced fifteen Nobel laureates. Some of Japan’s most prominent technological contributions are in the fields of electronics, automobiles, machinery, and leads the world in robotic production and use. Despite the luxurious lives they live, as a community they have never thanked Allah by submitting to him.
Denying the Lordship of Allah and refusing to submit to Him in worship is the biggest act of injustice.
Haitham al-Haddad at Hizb ut-Tahrir’s Khilafah conference, London, 2011:
“The last lesson that I would like to mention here is, brothers and sisters, we have seen that the Ummah tried all types of ideologies after 1924, after the fall of Khilafah. They tried nationalism, they tried socialism, they tried capitalism, recently they tried liberalism but they realised that these ideologies are falling them down. These ideologies are letting the Ummah down. And now they are looking for a solution. It is true that in certain places they haven’t clearly said that they want Islam or they want the unity of Ummah and they want Khilafah, they haven’t said that. But Allah is preparing the whole Ummah to reach to that conclusion. And recently we have heard so many reports from Egypt, from other places, that they are convinced that the only solution that brings about real change in the whole world is Islam.“