France banned anti-Islamic play in 1890 after opposition from the Ottoman Caliphate
A future Caliphate will use all its political, economic and military resources to protect the honour of the Prophets
Refutation of the paper – The Tanzimat: Secular Reforms in the Ottoman Empire
Although the Ottoman State towards its demise severely declined in many areas this doesn’t negate the sharia rules which were implemented correctly
Somalia Famine: Aid as a weapon of war and a future Caliphate's response
Ten million Muslims are suffering in the Horn of Africa amidst the worst drought seen in 60 years.
19 January 2012
Yousaf Gilani in Court: Unlike democracy there is no immunity from prosecution in the Caliphate
Posted by AK | 19 January 2012 | Category:
Ruling
|
0
comments
Pakistan’s supreme court called Prime Minister Yousaf Gilani before it on contempt of court proceedings after the government persistently ignored court orders to write to Swiss authorities and ask for a dormant money laundering case to be reopened against President Asif Ali Zardari.
In response Gilani told the court, "He (Zardari) has complete immunity inside and outside the country...In the constitution, there is complete immunity for the president. There is no doubt about it."
A feature of the democratic Republican system is the concept of immunity from prosecution where the head of state is effectively above the law. This is not unique to Pakistan where Zardari a well-known criminal nicknamed Mr 10% can escape justice while he is President, but exists in other democracies notably Italy where Berlusconi enjoyed immunity for years.
Islam firmly believes in the rule of law which is the sharia. No one in the Caliphate including the Caliph is above the law or has immunity from prosecution. Unlike man-made law sharia cannot be manipulated and changed to suit the personal interests of the Caliph or his entourage or for benefit and harm.
The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم firmly established this principle of rule of law in the following hadith.
Narrated ‘Aisha: The people of Quraish worried about the lady from Bani Makhzum who had committed theft. They asked, “Who will intercede for her with Allah's Messenger?”
Some said, “No one dare to do so except Usama bin Zaid the beloved one to Allah's Messenger.”
When Usama spoke about that to Allah’s Messenger he said: “Do you try to intercede for somebody in a case connected with Allah’s Prescribed Punishments?”
Then he got up and delivered a sermon saying, “What destroyed the nations preceding you, was that if a noble amongst them stole, they would forgive him, and if a poor person amongst them stole, they would inflict Allah's Legal punishment on him. By Allah, if Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad stole, I would cut off her hand.” [Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Number 681]
If Fatima رضي الله عنها the daughter of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and leader of the women in jannah is not above the law, then how can Zardari the criminal have immunity?
9 January 2012
We cannot compromise Islam to protect the tourist industry
Posted by AK | 9 January 2012 | Category:
Comment
|
0
comments
With Islamic parties taking power in Egypt and Tunisia concerns have been raised over the future of the tourist industry which brings in billions of dollars in revenue each year. Western tourists, for example flock to the sandy beaches of Sharm al-Sheikh where alcohol and free mixing between men and bikini clad women takes place.
Saad al-Husseini, a member of Egypt's Freedom and Justice Party executive bureau said in a recent interview, that Tourism is very important for Egypt and stressed that drinking and selling alcohol are forbidden in Islam. However, he then added, "Yet Islamic laws also prohibit spying on private places and this applies to beaches as well...I wish 50 million tourists would travel to Egypt even if they come nude."
There are two points to consider when addressing the Islamic viewpoint towards tourism.
Firstly, as Muslims we must submit to all the laws of Allah سبحانه وتعالى. The sharia has not remained silent on ruling and economy. It contains detailed rules on what government revenues are permitted in an Islamic State including the imposing of temporary taxes if there was a budget shortfall. We must not try and circumvent these rules to achieve some material benefit. Our position is “we hear and we obey” not “we hear and we disobey”.
The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said:
لَا تَرْتَكِبوُا مَا ارْتَكَبَتِ الْيَهُودُ فَتَسْتَحِلُّوا مَحَارِمَ اللهِ بِأَدْنَى الْحِيَل
“Do not repeat what the yahud committed, and violate Allah's prohibitions using deceitful tricks.” [Tafsir ibn Kathir]
The Qur’an contains many stories of the previous generations that we may take a lesson and reminder from. One such story is the fisherman of Bani Israel who circumvented the ruling on the Sabbath for material benefit and suffered a severe punishment.
وَاسْأَلْهُمْ عَنِ الْقَرْيَةِ الَّتِي كَانَتْ حَاضِرَةَ الْبَحْرِ إِذْ يَعْدُونَ فِي السَّبْتِ إِذْ تَأْتِيهِمْ حِيتَانُهُمْ يَوْمَ سَبْتِهِمْ شُرَّعًا وَيَوْمَ لَا يَسْبِتُونَ ۙ لَا تَأْتِيهِمْ ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ نَبْلُوهُمْ بِمَا كَانُوا يَفْسُقُونَ
وَإِذْ قَالَتْ أُمَّةٌ مِنْهُمْ لِمَ تَعِظُونَ قَوْمًا ۙ اللَّهُ مُهْلِكُهُمْ أَوْ مُعَذِّبُهُمْ عَذَابًا شَدِيدًا ۖ قَالُوا مَعْذِرَةً إِلَىٰ رَبِّكُمْ وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَّقُونَ
فَلَمَّا نَسُوا مَا ذُكِّرُوا بِهِ أَنْجَيْنَا الَّذِينَ يَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ السُّوءِ وَأَخَذْنَا الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا بِعَذَابٍ بَئِيسٍ بِمَا كَانُوا يَفْسُقُونَ
فَلَمَّا عَتَوْا عَنْ مَا نُهُوا عَنْهُ قُلْنَا لَهُمْ كُونُوا قِرَدَةً خَاسِئِينَ
Ask them about the town which was by the sea when they broke the Sabbath – when their fish came to them near the surface on their Sabbath day but did not come on the days which were not their Sabbath. In this way We put them to the test because they were deviators. When a group of them said, ‘Why do you rebuke a people whom Allah is going to destroy or severely punish?’ they said, ‘So that we have an excuse to present to your Lord, and so that hopefully they will gain taqwa.’ Then when they forgot what they had been reminded of, We rescued those who had forbidden the evil and seized those who did wrong with a harsh punishment because they were deviators. When they were insolent about what they had been forbidden to do, We said to them, ‘Be apes, despised, cast out!’ [Al-Araaf, 7:163-166]
Secondly, we do not change Islam to fit the reality, rather we change the reality to fit Islam. The economies of Egypt, Tunisia and most Muslim countries are suffering under decades of mismanagement, and corruption with policies aimed at benefiting western colonialists. The tourist industry and the resulting munkar it brings is just one aspect of an interest-based economy, with severe poverty and no manufacturing base. When faced with such a reality Islam obliges us to radically transform such an economy to an Islamic economy which will bring prosperity for the entire Muslim Ummah and not simply the corrupt rulers and their western backers.
Will there be tourism in the Khilafah?
Tourists visiting the Khilafah is permitted but is controlled by the sharia rules related to foreign policy.
Article 183 of Hizb ut-Tahrir’s draft constitution states:
“Conveying the Islamic da’wah is the core around which the foreign policy revolves, and upon which relations between the State and other states are built.”
Tourism would be in line with this objective where people entering the Khilafah would see the practical implementation of Islam, and this is a dawah for them.
The citizens of other nations who wish to enter the state fall under various categories as outlined in Article 184 of the draft constitution.
Article 184
The state's relations with other states are built upon four considerations. These are:
1. States in the current Islamic world are considered to belong to one state and, therefore, they are not included within the sphere of foreign affairs. Relations with these countries are not considered to be in the realm of foreign policy and every effort should be expended to unify all these countries into one state.
2. States who have economic, commercial, friendly or cultural treaties with our State are to be treated according to the terms of the treaties. If the treaty states so, their subjects have the right to enter the State with an identity card without the need for a passport provided our subjects are treated in a like manner. The economic and commercial relations with such states must be restricted to specific items and specific characters which are deemed necessary and which, at the same time, do not lead to the strengthening of these states.
3. States with whom we do not have treaties, the actual imperialist states, like Britain, America and France and those states that have designs on the State, like Russia are considered to be potentially belligerent states. All precautions must be taken towards them and it would be wrong to establish diplomatic relations with them. Their subjects may enter the Islamic State only with a passport and a visa specific to every individual and for every visit, unless it became a real belligerent country
4. With states that are actually belligerent states, like Israel, a state of war must be taken as the basis for all dispositions with them. They must be dealt with as if a real war existed between us - whether an armistice exists or not - and all their subjects are prevented from entering the State.
Non-Muslims legitimately entering the Islamic State are called Mu’ahid (covenanted person) who are protected by the state and no harm can be done to them.
The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "The one who kills a covenanted person during the period of his covenant he will not smell the fragrance of jannah, though its fragrance can be smelled from a distance of five hundred years march." [Reported by Ibn Hibbaan in his Sahih]
Muslims travelling outside the Khilafah will also be subjected to the sharia rules related to foreign policy. Although their journey maybe for a variety of reasons, primarily they are dawah carriers who are ambassadors for Islam wherever they travel. Historically, Muslim traders travelled throughout the world and many people accepted Islam from them.
Unlike non-Muslims the objective in life for Muslims is to worship Allah سبحانه وتعالى which means sacrificing many material pleasures for the ultimate, everlasting pleasure in jannah. Therefore, Muslims in the Khilafah who want to travel and see the world will do so by joining the armed forces and opening new lands to Islam, rather than spending two weeks by the pool in a 5 star hotel.
The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “The siyaahah (tourism) of my ummah is jihad for the sake of Allah.” [Abu Dawood]
18 December 2011
Islam is the only cure to Britain's alcohol crisis
Posted by AK | 18 December 2011 | Category:
Comment
|
0
comments
Allah Most High describes the harmful nature of alcohol in the Holy Qur'an:
يَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْخَمْرِ وَالْمَيْسِرِ ۖ قُلْ فِيهِمَا إِثْمٌ كَبِيرٌ وَمَنَافِعُ لِلنَّاسِ وَإِثْمُهُمَا أَكْبَرُ مِنْ نَفْعِهِمَا
“They will ask you about alcoholic drinks and gambling. Say, ‘There is great wrong in both of them and also certain benefits for mankind. But the wrong in them is greater than the benefit.’” [Al-Baqarah, 2:219]
An article in today’s Independent on Sunday states:
New research from the Department of Health underlines how excess alcohol affects almost every aspect of British life. More than 2.6m children in the UK now live with a parent who drinks at hazardous levels. Mortality rates from liver disease among under-75s rose by 16 per cent between 2001 and 2009, new statistics show. And lost productivity because of hung over staff cost businesses £1.7bn a year.
Medical experts in Britain are calling for a minimum price on alcohol to dissuade people from binge drinking which they partly attribute to the wide availability of cheap booze. This solution of using high prices to control demand for harmful things is already used for tobacco and was also proposed for fatty foods to control obesity. The Health Secretary Andrew Lansley is correct when he warns that deep-rooted drinking habits in some areas mean that boosting the price of booze will do little to curb excess. This can be seen with illegal drugs where high prices and risk of prison do not deter people from buying them, leading some to call for their legalisation.
The only way to stop people drinking alcohol is to replace their current belief in freedom with belief in a Creator Allah Most High who will account them for all their actions when they die. When the narrowness of this short life is compared with the ever-lasting life of the hereafter it becomes easy to give up short term pleasures like alcohol in return for unimaginable pleasures in Paradise which will never end.
This is the belief of Islam. It’s this belief that led to the problem of alcohol being resolved 1400 years ago in the first Islamic State of Medina, something the most powerful countries on earth in the 21st century cannot resolve.
The following hadith describes the situation in Medina at the time when alcohol was banned and is narrated by Anas ibn Malik who was a bartender at the time.
Anas ibn Malik narrates: ‘The alcoholic drink which was spilled was Al-Fadikh. I used to offer alcoholic drinks to the people at the residence of Abu Talha. Then the order of prohibiting Alcoholic drinks was revealed, and the Prophet ordered somebody to announce that: Abu Talha said to me, "Go out and see what this voice (this announcement ) is." I went out and (on coming back) said, "This is somebody announcing that alcoholic beverages have been prohibited." Abu Talha said to me, "Go and spill it (i.e. the wine)," Then it (alcoholic drinks) was seen flowing through the streets of Medina. At that time the wine was Al-Fadikh. The people said, "Some people (Muslims) were killed (during the battle of Uhud) while wine was in their stomachs." So Allah revealed:
لَيْسَ عَلَى الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ جُنَاحٌ فِيمَا طَعِمُوا
“On those who believe and do good deeds there is no blame for what they ate (in the past).” [Al-Maaida, 5:93]
(Sahih al-Bukhari, Book #60, Hadith #144)
26 November 2011
Pakistan government allows NATO to kill 28 of its soldiers
Posted by AK | 26 November 2011 | Category:
Comment
|
0
comments
The humiliation of Muslims in Pakistan continues unabated with the active support of Zardari's government. The killing of 28 soldiers in Pakistan adds to the growing death toll of Muslims at the hands of US-led NATO forces.
The obvious question is why a nuclear-power with a huge army and airforce cannot protect its own Muslim citizens from being attacked by so-called allies? This question was answered by the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم when he described a situation like what is happening in the Muslim world today.
The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "The People will soon summon one another to attack you from every place in the same way that a pack calls around its prey." Someone asked, "Will that be because of our small numbers at that time?" He replied, "No, you will be numerous at that time: but you will be froth and scum like that carried down by a torrent (of water), and Allah will take the fear of you from the breasts (hearts) of your enemy and cast al-wahn into your hearts." Someone asked, "O Messenger of Allah , what is al-wahn?" He replied, "Love of the world and dislike of death." (Ahmed)
It's wahn that has infected the government of Pakistan, the army leadership and the general public. Unless we remove wahn from our hearts, remove the corrupt government and army leadership and replace them with the righteous Caliphate, the humiliation will simply get worse.
29 October 2011
France banned anti-Islamic play in 1890 after opposition from the Ottoman Caliphate
Posted by AK | 29 October 2011 | Category:
History
|
0
comments
Henri de Bornier, a French poet and dramatist wrote an anti-Islamic play called Mahomet in 1889. The French Prime Minister Charles de Freycinet banned the play in 1890 after opposition from the Ottoman Caliphate.
“Bornier himself was the victim of blind and unreasoning Muslim prejudice in regard to his Mahomet. The play was being rehearsed in 1889 when a Turkish newspaper reproduced from a French journal the news of its forthcoming production. The French Foreign Ministry assured the Turkish ambassador in Paris, Es’at Pasha, that the play did not constitute an attack on the Prophet and on the cherished beliefs of the Muslims. Bornier pointed out that the Persian ta’ziyas or passion plays regularly depicted the death of Muhammad as well as those of the Shi’ite martyrs, and he offered to accept prohibition of his work's being played in Algeria and Tunisia. These arguments still failed to satisfy the Turkish authorities, and in 1890 the head of the government, Freycinet, banned the production of Mahomet in France, a prohibition which, it was reported, gave much pleasure to the Sultan Abd al-Hamid II. It must be admitted that Muslims would undeniably find offensive a play in which their Prophet killed himself because of a woman and because of inferiority feelings vis-a-vis Christianity, but there is no evidence that either the Turkish ambassador or the Sultan had seen the play, much less read it, when they first objected to it. The French government's surrender to this Turkish pressure was plausibly attributed by Martino to the contemporary political situation, for in 1889 the German Emperor William II was beginning his journey to Istanbul and the Near East, and France feared to do anything which might drive Turkey further into Germany's arms; the susceptibilities of France's numerous Muslim subjects in North Africa must also have been a consideration. Not till 1896 were excerpts from Mahomet presented to the public in a special arrangement for theatrical declamation. Since Bornier's time, no major European dramatist seems to have essayed a play on the life of the Prophet.”
Source: C. E. Bosworth, 'A Dramatisation of the Prophet Muhammad's Life: Henri de Bornier's "Mahomet",' Numen, Vol. 17, Fasc. 2 (Aug., 1970), p. 116
A future Caliphate will use all its political, economic and military resources to protect the honour of the Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) and all the other Prophets including Adam, Noah (Nuh), Moses (Musa) and Jesus son of Mary (Isa ibn Maryam), peace be upon them all.
By Abdul-Kareem Newell
10 October 2011
Refutation of the paper – 'The Tanzimat: Secular Reforms in the Ottoman Empire'
Posted by AK | 10 October 2011 | Category:
Comment
|
12
comments
وَلَنْ تَرْضَىٰ عَنْكَ الْيَهُودُ وَلَا النَّصَارَىٰ حَتَّىٰ تَتَّبِعَ مِلَّتَهُمْ
“The Jews and the Christians will never be pleased with you until you follow their religion.”
[Al-Baqara, 2:120]
At the beginning of the 21st century the Jews and Christians (western world) launched a new crusade against the Islamic ummah with the aim of destroying Islam. This war takes many forms from the killing of Muslims in the war on terror to attacking Islamic thoughts under the guise of reforming Islam. The recently published paper ‘The Tanzimat: Secular Reforms in the Ottoman Empire’ by Ishtiaq Hussain is an attempt at ‘reforming’ Muslims view towards the Islamic concept of Caliphate (Khilafah).
Any idea that contradicts Islam by its nature is weak although it may look strong due to the lies, misquotations and twisted arguments used to propagate it. This is what the Arabic word kufr means which is derived from the root verb kafara (to cover, to hide) i.e. to cover up the truth. This paper on the Ottoman Empire is one such example.
The paper’s fundamental premise is that Islamic groups view the Ottoman State as a model for establishing a future Caliphate. In short this premise is false which undermines the rest of the paper’s claims. Islamic groups working to re-establish the Caliphate such as Hizb ut-Tahrir do not view the later period of the Ottoman State as a model and have in fact devoted many books to discussing this period in detail and labelling it as a period of decline.
Fiyaz Mughal in the forward writes:
"Islamists often bypass these facts and use a warped interpretation of history in order to weave their own narrative into mainstream debate. They project their own picture of a ‘perfect’ Ottoman society, living under a deeply rigid interpretation of Shariah Law in order to argue for the building of a modern day Islamic Caliphate."
Ironically Mughal contradicts his above statement by quoting Osama bin Laden twice where Osama explicitly states his model of Caliphate is the “righteous Caliphate” or “Khilafah Rashida” in Arabic not the Ottoman Caliphate. The term Khilafah Rashida refers to the first 30 years of the Khilafah under the leadership of the noble companions of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.
Interestingly the author starts the paper agreeing with Hizb ut-Tahrir’s interpretation of history that the mid-18th century was a period of decline.
Hussain writes:
“During the 16th century, the Ottoman Empire was at its peak as a world super power, but by the mid-18th Century it had considerably weakened.”
Hizb ut-Tahrir states:
"Since the middle of the twelfth century Hijri (eighteenth century C.E.) the Islamic world has been rapidly declining from its correct position and sinking horribly to the abyss of decline." [Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir]
After a detailed discussion of the Tanzimat reforms Hussain concludes:
“Whilst Hizb-u-Tahrir does not espouse violence in communities, their pamphlets and literature regularly promote a narrow historical view of the Ottoman Empire by harping back to a misleading narrative on the Khilafah. In so doing, they ignore the pragmatism that formed the basis of the Tanzimat period of the Ottoman Empire.”
Rather than making up facts about Muslims which is haram and a major sin in Islam (although permissible under liberal values) let’s see what HT actually says in its core book Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir concerning this period. The full book is widely and freely available to read here. [http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.org/PDF/EN/en_books_pdf/Concepts.pdf]
At the end of the 13th century Hijri (19th century C.E.) the misunderstanding of the Islamic Shari’ah and its application on the society became obvious. Islam was interpreted in ways incompatible with its texts in order to adapt to the present society, [PRAGMATISM] although what was required was to change the society to adapt with Islam, and not the other way round. For the issue was the corruption of society which needed to be reformed by an ideology (mabda’a), so the ideology had to be applied as it is, and the society had to be changed completely and radically on the basis of this ideology. Thus, it was necessary for those who attempted to reform the society to apply the Islamic rules as they are, regardless of society, era, time or place.
However, they didn’t do this; rather they misinterpreted the Islamic rules to adapt them to contemporary life. The excesses of this error could be seen in the derivation of general and detailed principles. They derived general principles and detailed rules that agreed with this viewpoint. Thus, they established numerous erroneous general principles, such as; “It is not prohibited to change the rules according to the changing of the time”, and like, “Tradition is the arbiter” etc. They issued fatwas without any support or evidence from Shar’a, and some of them even contradicted the definite Qur’anic text. For example, they permitted a little usury (riba) on the pretext that it is not multiple, and by the excuse of its necessity for the funds of the minor (qassir). The judge who was called a Shar’ai judge came to judge with usury (riba) on the deposits of the orphans. The judge, whom they called the regular judge also ruled with usury (riba).
They gave fatwa to suspend Hudood (penal code) and allowed the Hudood to be taken from a source other than Islam. Thus they laid down rules contradicting Shar’a using the excuse that these agree more with the time, and it is necessary that Islam suit every age, time and place. This resulted in the detachment of Islam from life. This erroneous understanding and incorrect rules was used by the enemies of Islam to introduce their laws and principles. The Muslims did not see in them any contradiction with Islam, due to what had been established in their minds based on the erroneous understanding that Islam suits every time and place. The misinterpretation of Islam to suit every school of thought, ideology, incident and every principle - even if the interpretation disagreed with the ideology of Islam and its viewpoint - became prevalent. This helped in the separation of Islam from life and consequently the failure of every reformist movement working according to this erroneous and poor comprehension was inevitable.
Conclusion
Muslims should take a very important lesson from the secular tanzimat reforms and vow never to repeat this mistake again. As the above excerpt mentions distancing oneself from the Islamic ideology will bring disaster on the ummah as we have witnessed. The conclusion of these reforms was the weakening of the Caliphate until it was finally destroyed as an institution in 1924. The kuffar colonialists Britain and France carved up the Muslim lands (Sykes-picot) between them, raping the resources and propping up brutal regimes to torture and subjugate the people. These plans are beginning to unravel after the Arab spring which has removed a major obstacle in the path of establishing a future Caliphate namely fear of the brutal pro-western regimes.
The model for a future Caliphate is the sunnah of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and the sunnah of the Rightly Guided Caliphs (Khulufa Rashida).
On the authority of Abu Najih Al-Erbadh bin Sariah, who said: The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم gave us a sermon by which our hearts were filled with fear and tears came to our eyes. We said: "O Messenger of Allah, it is as though this is a farewell sermon, so counsel us." He صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "I counsel you to fear Allah and to give absolute obedience even if a slave becomes your leader. Verily he among you who lives [long] will see great controversy, so you must keep to my sunnah and to the sunnah of the rightly-guided Khalifahs - cling to them stubbornly. Beware of newly invented matters, for every invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is a going astray, and every going astray is in Hell-fire." [Abu Dawud and Al-Tirmidhi]
The Islamic Caliphate is not a utopia but is a state where Islam is implemented by human beings upon human beings who by their nature are weak and prone to commit errors. The Caliphate went through many different periods in its history which were summarised in a prophecy by the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم.
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "There will be Prophethood for as long as Allah wills it to be, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be Khilafah on the Prophetic method and it will be for as long as Allah wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be biting Kingship for as long as Allah Wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be oppressive kingship for as long as Allah wills, then he will remove it when He wills, and then there will be Khilafah upon the Prophetic method" and then he remained silent. (Ahmed)
Muslims are working to establish the righteous Caliphate based upon the Prophetic method as the hadith mentions. We do not want to repeat the mistakes of history. Having said this although the Ottoman State towards its demise severely declined in many areas this doesn’t negate the sharia rules which were implemented correctly in both the earlier and later periods. For example Sultan Abdul-Hamid II stance on Palestine continues to inspire us to this day.
"Advise Dr. Herzil not to take any further steps in his project. I cannot give away a handful of the soil of this land for it is not my own, it is for all the Islamic Nation. The Islamic Nation that fought Jihad for the sake of this land and they have watered it with their blood. The Jews may keep their money and millions. If the Islamic Khilafah State is one day destroyed then they will be able to take Palestine without a price! But while I am alive, I would rather push a sword into my body than see the land of Palestine cut and given away from the Islamic State. This is something that will not be, I will not start cutting our bodies while we are alive." [Sultan Abdul-Hamid II]
We must never forget the great conquest of Constantinople which was opened up to Islam by the Ottomans fulfilling one half of the famous Islamic prophecy. The future Caliphate should aspire to fulfil the second half of this prophecy i.e. the opening of Rome to Islam.
Abu Qubayl said: “We were with Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-As, and he was asked which of the two cities would be conquered first, Constantinople or Rome? Abdullah called for a box that had rings and took a letter out of it. He said: “Whilst we were with the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, we would write things down. When he was asked which of these two cities would be conquered first, Constantiple or Rome, the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “The city of Heraclius will be conquered first”, meaning Constantinople.” [Ahmad, Ad-Darimi, Abu Shaybah, Al-Hakim]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)






