Critical Summary 20

SHARE

This is the second of 3 vital questions regarding Sunni Islam: Why did the Ottoman sultans never make Hajj and why were they exempted from Hajj-Mabrur, and why is this fact of Islamic history vital to understand the over-arching power of scholars and clerics controlling the civilisation of Sunni Islam, as well as understanding fundamentally-comprehensive historical Sunni Islam jurisprudence concepts such as “necessity makes the permissible prohibited” resulting in the allowance of modern-day Muslim female suicide bombers voluntarily choosing to die and kill others [1].

How does this vital segment of history in Sunni Islam create other tragedies you see but cannot understand, and empower Islamic terrorists who want to revive the Caliphate?

How would you understand Islamic terrorists, and how would you permanently turn people away from the falseness and evil of jihād regardless of whether they are in prison or not, including jihādists such as Mohamed Hamdouch whom Soeren Kern was interviewing [2], and Dutch-Moroccan Mohammed Bouyeri who savagely murdered the film maker Theo Van Gogh but is remorseless about what he did?

Please read that interview conducted by Soeren Kern with Mohamed Hamdouch. Can you understand why Mohamed Hamdouch uses the words that he says, and why he is correct according to Islam but to someone who has inadequate knowledge of the relevant scriptures, you might think he is lying or deluded? 

In more than 30 years of research covering Islamic law and Islam, Professor Ahmet Akgündüz [3] was especially busy covering the practise of Sharīʿah in the Ottoman caliphate. He wrote an article titled ““Why Did The Ottoman Sultans Not Make Hajj (Pilgrimage)”, which has been quoted on sites such as Ummah.com by abu yusaf on 19 June 2004 at 5.18 pm, and AhleSunnaTV (a media company based in Leiceister, United Kingdom to “spread the message of the Ahlu Sunnah Wal Jama’ah”) on their facebook page, in an entry dated 27 October 2013.

Some sites have removed the article but nevertheless, the relevant pages have been screen-capped of several sites containing this article by the professor, which you can find at islamis.is, including the one at ummah.com [4].

In the history of the Ottoman Sultans, none of the Sultans have ever gone for Hajj. Hajj was not obligatory for 20 years after 937 A.C., because of the rebellion of the Karamita Group. How are these two historical events linked? Do you know the one oral tradition which led to the Ottoman Sultans spending at least half their lives on the battlefield?          

This is what the professor wrote:

[ This is an oft-asked question and the best occasion to answer this question is the issue of Osman II, for the answer thereto was given in the Incident of the Assassination of Osman II. First of all, we should summarize the stipulations for Hajj to be obligatory (fardh): To be a Muslim; to be mentally sane; to have reached the age of discretion; to be so rich as to cover the expenses for Hajj, both for provisions and journey; to be aware that Hajj is compulsory; safety of the journey. After this brief explanation, let us seek the reply to that question why the Ottoman Sultans did not go for Hajj:

1) According to Islamic Legislation, al-Jihad is a fardh al-qifayah (duty the observance of which by some will absolve the rest) for Muslims. For this reason, a Muslim, as an individual, will be able to prefer Hajj, which is a fardh al-ain (duty applicable to all), unless there is an apparent danger of an enemy to Jihad, which is a fardh al-qifayah. Thus Jihad would not form an obstacle for individual Muslims’ performing Hajj, with the mere exception that there arise a requirement for those Muslims who would go for Hajj so that the enemy could be overcome. And that is where the decree for Caliphs and Sultans differs from the other Muslim individuals. That is, Jihad, i.e. eliminating the enemy’s attack and thus ensuring the Muslims’ safety and if and when so needed fighting is an absolute obligation (fardh al-ain) for Caliphs and Sultan. When the Blessed Prophet was asked which deed was more virtuous, he replied they were belief in Allah and His Prophet, Jihad in His Divine Cause, and Hajj al-Mabrur respectively. The reason thereof is obvious: Protecting Muslims’ lives, properties and chastity is among the public rights, also known as Hukukullah, viz. it is a devotion pertaining to the public. Sometimes a matter of public rights becomes more important than personal obligations (fardhs). And this is the same case here.

All the Ottoman Sultans up to Selim II spent half their lives on campaigns of Jihad for the Divine cause of Allah. As a matter of fact, the Islamic scholars issued fatwahs (judgments) that the Sultans should prefer Jihad that was incumbent upon them as fardh al-ain in quality of Hukukullah (public law) and the maintenance of the order of the world to Hajj, a personal obligatory deed. While Bayezid II was intending to go for Hajj when he was Governor of Amasya, with a letter undersigned by Grand Vizier and the other leading statesmen he was advised to have to sit on the throne with no delay at all leaving making Hajj to the public and those who was not involved in administering the State or otherwise he would cause the enemy to be encouraged to attack Muslims.

Likewise, Sultan Osman II, who was insistently willing to make Hajj the price of which he paid with his life, was given by Es’ad Effendi, Shaikhulislam and his father-in- law, exactly the following fatwah summarizing this decree of the Islamic Jurisprudence (al-Fiqh): “Hajj is not incumbent upon Sultans; they would rather sit on the throne and do the justice lest an instigation should arise”. Again, Aziz Mahmud Hudai, the most eminent personage of the time, endorsed that fatwah, earnestly warned Osman II so that he should abide by that fatwah. As a matter of fact, the statement of Yahia Effendi, who was reproved by the Sultan to have provoked soldiers in that matter and later appointed as Shaikhulislam, was entirely in accordance with the criteria of the Islamic Jurisprudence:

“O my Sultan! Far it be from the scholars who pray for your good to provoke bandits. Nevertheless, we sincerely were unwilling to consent to that your wish, for your forefathers did not perform it, did not go for that journey. And this is all our sin, if any.”

While on the other hand, the following expressions that summarize the rumors that spread in public and in the army expound the matter:

“Sultans have ever given up Hajj for the maintenance of the order of the world. It is wrong to leave Mamaliq al-Makhrusah (the Imperial Ottoman Dominions, as divinely protected) in the existence of the possibility that the enemy appear and cause instigation throughout the country.”

2) In explanation of the stipulation of having a sound body, some Islamic legalists stated that even if a person was healthy, being imprisoned or being afraid of a tyrannical administrator preventing him from making Hajj would hinder the performance of Hajj; and they came to the conclusion that the Sultan – and those statesmen in the same situation – would also be regarded as confined and that Hajj would be compulsory for the Sultan only from his personal properties other than the public goods and that as long as that excuse continued to exist he might not be able to go for Hajj until his death. And in a century when the means of transport were not yet so sophisticated as those of our time and the task of Hajj took at least three months it comes to mean being incognizant of the Islamic Laws to think that the Ottoman Sultans should have performed the duty of Hajj. As a matter of fact, it cannot be asked why the Ottoman Sultans, who spent half of their lives on fronts, went for Jihad as far as Egypt but did not go for Hajj, for a Sultan who went on a campaign at the head of the army as a Mujahid (Warrior of Islam) could not be the same as one who left his country alone for three months for his personal devotions. The most substantial example of this was the reaction of not only the army but of the public against Osman II. Again, Islamic scholars expressed that Hajj (pilgrimage) was not obligatory for 20 years after 326 A.H./ 937 A.C. because of the rebellion of Karamita Group, which violated the safety of route, which is one of the stipulations of Hajj, for Hajj travelers might be confronted with anarchy on their way.

To sum up, it was not compulsory by Religion for the Ottoman Sultans to make Hajj. Nonetheless, they certainly sent someone else in their lieu. Still, it is said that Sultan Abdulaziz secretly made Hajj in disguise. However, there is no document in hand to evidence this.]

That above is the article the professor wrote. How does this tie-in to jihād? How does this tie-in to the Victory and Consolidation of Islam on this planet, whereby Sunni Muslims today wanting to revive the Caliphate emulate the first three Rightful Caliphs of Sunni Islam, as the Ottoman Sultans emulated the first three Rightful Caliphs of Sunni Islam, because they are willing to kill and/or imprison non-Muslims and Muslims to conquer lands not under Islamic rule nor controlled by Muslims?

One of the 2 Darussalam books demonstrates how Boko Haram, Al-Qaeda, Islamic State, Taliban, and other terrorist groups are merely emulating the best earliest Muslims and waging certain obligatory duties on behalf of all Muslims, as revealed by this Turkish professor, to defend Islamic lands and the rights of all Muslims [5].

Have you ever heard of how underwear bomber Abdullah Hassan Al-Asiri was trying to emulate the earliest Muslims in getting rid of those classified as hypocrital Muslims, by attempting to assassinate prince Muhammad bin Nayef of Saudi Arabia, while feigning repentance? Where do you think he hid the explosives, and how did he prepare for that? What was his intention?

In response to his request which required fellow jihādists to help him prepare for this event, a certain sheikh issued a fatwa which justifies what Abdullah Hassan Al-Asiri requested, and all this was summarised in an article by Raymond Ibrahim [6]. For the full details including how Raymond Ibrahim is proven right at a nairaland forum and why this fatwa is not a joke, start at page 245 in More Than Murtadd [7].

Please click on Raymond Ibrahim’s well-written article to read the short but succinct fatwa by the sheikh, who declares sodomy is forbidden in Islam but also knows the fundamental principle of Islamic jurisprudence which is overriding to justify violent jihad for the sake of Allah, which is “necessity makes the prohibited permissible”. The wording of that fatwa will help you understand important principles in Sunni Islam’s historical scholarship.

Obligatory matters are important, as a professor summarised to illustrate why the clerics could order the Ottoman Sultans to avoid Hajj, because fighting is an obligatory matter for Caliphs and Sultans who intend to emulate the earliest Muslims and the 4 Rightful Caliphs of Sunni Islam, and some Muslims must take on certain duties on behalf of all Muslims.

Caliph `Umar ibn Al-Khattb temporarily suspended the law of hadd during a certain year of famine, as narrated by mufassir Ibn Kathr. There are several overarching principles at work in this example, which is: Necessity makes the prohibited permissible, difficulty allows for ease, and this is an example of an exception to the ruling norm. How would you combine the principles of this important example with the principles of why the Ottoman Sultans never made Hajj, and why this post refuses to call them Osmanlis?

A jihādist attempting to advance the cause of Islam in a violent manner is also behaving in a fundamentally similar manner to the Caliphs and Sultans, because of attempting to emulate the prophet Muhammad and his Caliphate. The sheikh who issued the fatwa permitting an ignorant young man to be sodomised to achieve his goal while asking Allah to accept the sacrifice is merely acting in the same principles as the Caliph, making an exception to the rules.

It is obviously permitted because of the best 2 deeds in Islam, according to Sahîh Al-Bukhâri 2:26:594 [in-book referencing is 25:7; adīth 1519], in the Book of Hajj and under the chapter titled “The superiority of Al-Hajj-ul-Mabrur”:

[The Prophet was asked, “Which is the best deed?” He said, “To believe in Allah and His Apostle.” He was then asked, “Which is the next (in goodness)?” He said, “To participate in Jihād in Allah’s Cause.” He was then asked, “Which is the next?” He said, “To perform Hajj-Mabrur. “]

Before any Sunni Muslim claims this oral tradition is being misused, it is a fact that the best type of jihād historically acknowledged in Sunni Islam is what the first 2 Rightful Caliphs have done to emulate the prophet Muhammad, which involves a lot of killing and conquering of non-Muslims and geographical expansion to self-fulfill the prophecies in Sunni Islam about Muslims ultimately triumphing [8].

It is also a fact that as a Sunni Muslim, you are obliged to believe in the authentic Sunnah about the sun literally rising over a flat earth to create day and night and in the last Hour, this sun will not rise from the East but will rise from the West. If you want to refute any of the contents in this post, or other posts on this community exposing Islam, and you claim to be a Sunni Muslim, and you do not even know about a fundamental obligatory belief in Sunni Islam which is much simpler in comparison and also proves the non-divine Qur’ān and authentic Sunnah involving Sahîh Al-Bukhâri and Sahîh Muslim fundamentally wrong for more than 1000 years and why, you do not have any credibility to criticise the contents of these entries related to the topic of Islam, even if you try. 

Fortunately, Abdullah Hassan Al-Asiri did not succeed in killing the prince. Sadly, he wasted his life on an illusion. He believed that niyyah is what matters and in accordance with the principles of Tawhid because Allah is the only necessary witness, he has wholeheartedly intended to migrate to Allah solely for the sake of Allah, and he will achieve what he intended because his internal actions of the heart match at the beginning and the end.

Would you like to place a bet as to whether Imam an-Nawawī’s work was vital to helping this ignorant young man believe in what he was doing? Have you read the reviews of a certain book of Imam an-Nawawī’s work and why is in important, as summarised in an earlier Critical Summary?

This fatwa also proves what is previously forbidden and wrong in Islam therefore becomes legal and good, for the sake of the victory of Islam. Due to Islamic legislation and depending on the extent of knowledge of the jurists and clerical authorities in charge, anything previously prohibited can be justified for the sake of jihād, according to Sharīʿah being interpreted correctly. Examples include a Muslim woman becoming a suicide bomber, or sodomy being permitted under certain circumstances.

Throw in the concepts and examples of taqqiya and tawriya from the authentic Sunnah against the non-believers (which Raymond Ibrahim explains wonderfully at his website [9]. Inventing good information and keeping quiet where necessary for the sake of keeping the Ummah together is not lying, lying is permitted in war and war is never-ending against non-believers until the last Hour, and you (non-believer or not) will have to know how to navigate a field full of half-lies, necessary omissions, lies, half-truths and truths. Would you have known how and why to find such information to create the Critical Summaries?

We need to stop losing vulnerable minds to manipulative nonsense, such as how Jordanian member of Parliament Mazen Al-Dala’een lost his son and could not understand why it happened [10]. He is not the only grieving parent who has vowed to combat Islamic State.

If you want to end jihādists without killing them, not only would you have to be able to understand the minds of those who believe in violence, you must know how to expose Islam, know what and how to implement a global solution for Islam which includes tackling such jihādists effectively, and this includes certain other types of knowledge beyond Islam.

Anybody who knows all this becomes a true threat to Islam, which is why killing critics of Islam and Ex-Muslims is primarily to prevent any critics from ever reaching such a stage.

[1] https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/unprecedented-use-female-suicide-bombers

[2] https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5587/jihadist-mind

[3] http://nltimes.nl/2015/10/20/islamic-university-fire-lecturer-attacks-kurds

[4] http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?39435-Why-Did-The-Ottoman-Sultans-Not-Make-Hajj

[5] https://www.facebook.com/ShiftTheScript/posts/602024633291590

[6] https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3158/islam-sodomy

[7] http://islamis.is/245-2/

[8] https://www.facebook.com/ShiftTheScript/posts/602024633291590

[9] http://raymondibrahim.com/2014/04/12/taqiyya-about-taqiyya/

[10] https://www.memri.org/reports/jordanian-mp-whose-son-carried-out-isis-suicide-bombing-joins-fight-against-extremism

  

SHARE