Open Letter to Usama Hassan

Here is the letter again and here is the link to his to his talk at the launch of the British Muslims for Secular Democracy to contextualize it

http://www.rsa.org.uk/audio/index.asp - select the audio file of the lecture entitled “RSA Thursday The Secular State - the best option for British Muslims?”

OPEN LETTER TO BROTHER USAMA HASAN

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الحمد لله الذي كرم هذه الأمة بالشريعة السمحة الطاهرة وأيدها بالحجج الباهرة القاهرة ووطدها بالقواعد المتظاهرة المتناثرة ونورها بالأوضاع المتناسبة المتازرة

أحمده على نعمه الباطنة والظاهرة وأصلي على رسوله محمد وسائر النبيين والصالحين وأسلم صلاة وتسليما متواصلي الصلات في الدنيا والآخرة آمين

Dear Brother Usama,

We pray that this message arrives with you under the Shade of Allah’s Rahma, and we ask Allah to accept from us our good deeds, to overlook the evil we have done and will do, to strengthen us in the face of the enmity against Islam and the Muslims today, and to keep our hearts fixed upon the deen of Islam.

Your recent comments have compelled us to write this short letter of advice to you, as our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم mentioned that our deen is naseeha. We have made this letter open, since your opinions and comments have been made openly, and are available via various media. Even though you have sullied your own reputation by aligning yourself as public advisor to various unsavoury people (claiming that you were, in your own words, “very happy to be associated with the Quilliam Foundation”), and have even gone as far as promoting them publicly, and have rejected classical law in issues such as apostasy and hijab openly, even after all this there may still be one or two from amongst the sincere people of this umma who listen to what you have to say, perhaps out of respect for your father or for your own background. And for these reasons we have decided to give you this naseeha publicly for the sake of Allah and the protection of this umma, as far as we are able and May Allah forgive us our shortcomings and mistakes.

At the opening of this dishonourable foundation – which is well known to be run by people of ill-repute and questionable motives – you mentioned in a brief address that you had read ‘ibn Khuldoon’s muqaddima previously, and you interpreted his comments as supporting what you called “Islamic secularism”. You mentioned the narration of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم “you are more knowledgeable in your worldly affairs”, and explained how the scholars had said that the Prophets had not come to “to teach us medicine and agriculture and the crafts” and so on, and were sent for spiritual enlightenment. You then further repeated your assertion that the Prophets had not come to instruct us in the matters of the world, within which you included “government, administration, how we organise our schools” and so on, since these are “secular” or “worldly” matters.

This narration you quoted was mentioned by ‘ibn Khuldoon in the 26^th section of the second volume of his muqaddima, entitled Knowledge of Medicine or Medical Science, which came after some sections on logic, engineering etc., and just before a section regarding farming.

In fact the whole discussion of ‘ibn Khuldoon here was around the issue of tib al-nabawwi (Prophetic medicine) – since the Arabs of the time had much knowledge of medical issues, and so he argues that any medical issues narrated in the “shar’iyyaat”, meaning in this context the sunna and athaar, were from this angle, and he states that they are not from the revelation. Rather, they were narrated as part of the heritage and culture of the Arabs and were said in that context. (Please note – the issue of Prophetic medicine is one which is disputed between ulama, and it is not our intention to support any particular point of view within this discussion)

He then argues that RasoolAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم was sent only to teach the shara’i, and was not sent to teach medicine or any other issue from the ’aadiyaat (customary actions), and it is this context he mentioned the narration regarding the pollination of date trees that was mentioned.

“أنتم أعلم بامر دنياكم”

You are more knowledgable in your worldly affairs.

As can be recognised from the context, ibn Khuldoon was talking about issues such as the methods used in medicine, engineering, agriculture and so on, but does “government” fall under these categories? (And this is aside from the issue that in Islaam there is a difference between the hukm of an issue, and the wasaa’il used for the issue, and that Islaam came to explain the ahkaam and left open the wasaa’il).

The answer to anyone who has a small taste of Islamic knowledge is that they would reject such a position as you have articulated, that government is left completely open for man to decide as he please. And anyone who has read ibn Khuldoon’s muqaddima, would immediately recognise that this is a clear perversion and misrepresentation of his views.

In the 26^th section of the first volume of the book, entitled “the differences of the umma regarding the ruling of this position (the Khilafa or Imaama) and its criteria”, ‘ibn Khuldoon makes his position regarding ruling and government very clear.

ثم إن نصب اللإمام واجب قد عرف وجوبه في الشرع بإجماع الصحابة و التابعين — و استقر ذالك إجماعا دالا علي وجوب نصب الإمام

The appointment of the Imaam is obligatory, its obligation known in the shar’ by the ‘ijmaa (consensus) of the companions and the taabi’een … and the settling of that consensually/ upon consensus indicates the obligation of appointing the Imaam

What about the opinion that you alluded to, brother, that the government is open and left to the people to decide its form according to what they think is best, and Islam has nothing to say about it since it is from the “worldly” affairs? ‘ibn Khuldoon mentions those who fell into this – and they were some of the khawaarij and one of the mu’tazila scholars, who claimed that appointing an Imaam was not obligatory. And suffice it to say that ‘ibn Khuldoon rejects their views outright since they contradict the well known consensus. And even they did not deny that Islam demands the imposition of its rules and laws, in what you have called “worldly” or “secular” affairs, as Islam has rules regarding the mu’aamalaat and this is well known. Rather, in spite of their deviancies, they claimed that the obligation in their opinion was not the appointment of a leader, but rather the ensuring that the Islamic laws were implemented in whichever way.

What have other scholars said regarding this narration of our beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم ? Suffice it for us to mention to you the words of Imaam Nawawi in his explanation of Muslim

The first issue to notice is the title of the section –

باب وجوب امتثال ما قاله شرعا دون ما ذكره صلى الله عليه وسلم من معايش الدنيا على سبيل الرأي

the obligation to follow whatever the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم has said shar’an as opposed to what he has mentioned as his opinion regarding the livelihood/ living within the dunya.

And the first narration which is mentioned, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said

انما ظننت ظنا فلا تؤاخذوني بالظن ولكن اذا حدثتكم عن الله شيئا فخذوا به

“Rather it was only an idea that I had thought, so do not take from me in doubt but if I speak to you from Allah about an issue then take it from me”

The second narration

اذا امرتكم بشئ من دينكم فخذوا به واذا امرتكم بشئ من رأى فانما انا بشر

“If I ordered you by something from your deen then accept it, and if I ordered you by something from my opinion then I am only a man”

And the final narration mentioned

أنتم أعلم بامر دنياكم

“You are more knowledgeable in the issue of your dunya”

So what have the scholars said regarding this narration according to Nawawi?

قال العلماء قوله صلى الله عليه وسلم من رأيي اي في امر الدنيا ومعايشها لا على التشريع فأما ما قاله باجتهاده صلى الله عليه وسلم ورآه شرعا يجب العمل به وليس آبار النخل من هذا النوع

The ulama have said that the words of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم “from my opinion” means in the issue of the dunya and livelihood in it, and not regarding tashree’ – legislation. Rather in issues of legislation and what he صلى الله عليه وسلم has said from his ijtihaad and his shar’i opinion, it is obligatory to take from him, and pollination of date trees is not from this category. And I hope it is not necessary here to mention the opinion of Imaam Nawawi regarding Islamic governance, the obligation of the Caliphate, and so on, since it is well known that there is a consensus on these obligations according to the opinions of all the scholars of ahlul-sunna.

(*Side note – dear brother – haven’t your companions from the foundation you support previously claimed that the word tashree’ meaning legislation is a modern innovation ‘invented’ by Islamists? What do you say regarding our great Imaam Nawawi and the opinions of the scholars he has related?)

So if the use of the narration of our blessed Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was not used in the way you have claimed by ‘ibn Khuldoon, nor by Imaam Nawawi nor others from the classical ulama, is there no-one from the ulama of the past to back up the claim of you and the foundation you support that this narration does in fact mean that we as Muslims are free to liberate themselves from the obligation of the Caliphate, and can rule themselves as they please, by any laws they please?

Happily for you – the answer is yes. Sadly for you – the ‘scholar’ who did so was not ‘ibn Khuldoon, but rather Ali Abdul Raziq, who made the same claim that you and your companions made in his book “Islam and the Fundamentals of Ruling” back in 1925. For his troubles, his ijaaza was removed, he was thrown out of the circle of scholarship, and his book was deemed heretical by ulama all over the world.

Indeed, when the Council of Grand ulama of al-Alzhar, composed of 24 shuyukh, summarised their judgement against Abdul Raziq, they paid particular attention to the misuse of the narration, and stated unequivocally –

(The hadith was) “narrated regarding pollination of date trees, and is applied in those situations which are similar from matters of agriculture and others which are in matters that the shari’a did not come to teach, rather it (shari’a) came to explain its rules from the permitted and prohibited, the valid and invalid, and such things, which is known to the one who has a connection with the Book of Allah and the sunna of His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم ” (In other words, the shari’a came to explain the ahkaam not the various wasaa’il which can change according to technology, place etc.)

Many ulama also authored detailed refutations of Abdul Raziq, and mentioned the misuse of this narration, amongst them Sheikh ‘ibn ‘Aashoor, Sheikh-al-Azhar Muhammad Khidr Husain and Sheikh-al-Azhar Muhammad Bakhit al-Mutee’i.

Usama- Is it not enough for you, that ulama of all schools of thought, from the Muhaddith Ahmed Shaker, to Sheikh-ul-Islam Mustafa Sabri, to Imaam Kawthari, to Imaam Qaradawi, to Sheikh Shinqeeti, have all claimed that this secularism that you are alluding to, whatever name you call it, is nothing less than clear heresy? This claim of “Islamic Secularism” is nothing short of an “Islamic Judaism” or an “Islamic Christianity” or other such nonsensical statements.

What are the “worldy” issues that Islam does not deal with? According to ‘ibn Khuldoon, the Islamic law, courts, punishments, jihad, are all linked to Islamic governance under the Imaam. And he makes the difference between “rational politics” based upon legislation coming from the mind of the thinkers of society, and “siyyassa deeniyya”, the politics of the deen where the legislation is based upon what Allah has confirmed and legislated.

It can only be, that perhaps you read only part of the book, or left reading it for so long that you had forgotten what was in the earlier section, , or perhaps your tongue has overcome your head in these public events you are attending, or maybe you are unable to clearly articulate your true opinions. And there are many other excuses we will give you, dear brother, as is necessitated by the sunna of our beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم .

This deen is advice, and enjoining the good, and forbidding the wrong, so please permit us to mention some recommendations as to your next steps after you read this

• Return from your newly adopted “reformist” ideas that you have displayed openly recently, reject secularism and the bid’a of rejecting the obligation of the Caliphate, and return back from the opinions which are beyond that of even the khawarij to the opinions of ahlul-Sunna
• Disassociate yourself completely and openly from the companions of the foundation you support, and remove yourself from your position of advisor with them, since it is well known that they are deviants who are comfortable in places of ill-repute and partake in many haraam activities openly, and who attack the deen of our beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم through their words.
• Remove yourself from public activity for a period of time, dear brother, and seek solace with Allah, revise what you know from the Qur’an and sunna with a deeper look, and answer to yourself very clearly - exactly what is your purpose in this life, and where your loyalties should lie.

And forgive us if what we have said causes you distress or discomfort, and know that we have done so in the best of intentions, and these issues are from amongst those which confront and challenge the whole of our umma and so we could not remain silent on them for fear of greater harm that it may cause.

Wasalaam,

Your brother in Islam,

’abdulAllah bin ’abdulAllah

My own notes on this letter

1-This is a letter that has excellent content but I may think that it is a tad too harsh (giving Usama the benefit of the doubt)

2-Personally I am of the view, at the moment, that Usama is not a secularist but is playing with words in a very liberal manner. I certainly need clarification from him on the issue of apostasy and much more importantly on the issue of the Khimar in the Quran. It would be very worrying indeed if really believed that the Hijab was not an obligation

3-Since Usama has gone public with many confusing matters we will be forced to expose the inaccurate references and misrepresentations of Islam that he is making in public.

4-Just for you Usama, I may even have an article on souls and robots. I make no claim here of course though I am sure you will find it fascinating.