[Jalieteplalry]

Salaams. A question for the saudi hater/turkey lovers.

Don't you think that these two actually seem to be pretty strong allies to each other? Wouldn't you in fact be criticising one of the nations which turkey has deemed to be a force for good and an ally in the world? Turkey isnt shy to oppose nations that they dislike:

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/turkish-tro...083140672.html

However turkey and saudi appear to be cooperating quite a lot. Also, those who criticise saudi, given that generally speaking, its haraam to criticise the rulers, and given that many here advocate taqleed, where are the scholars taht have given ijtihad taht we shoudl criticise saudi whilst supporting turkey? Who are you making taqleed of in this particular matter?



Example Turkey and Saudi relations:

"Saudi-Turkey relations on a strong footing


JEDDAH: Turkey, which has partnered with Saudi companies in successfully completing the infrastructure of King Abdullah University of Science and Technology and many other projects in the Kingdom, said on Thursday night that its relations with Saudi Arabia have been expanding by leaps and bounds.

“Our political relations are at an impeccable level, which has led to a rapid development in the diversification of economic, commercial and social ties,” Turkish Consul General Salih Mutlu Sen said while addressing his country’s national day celebration. Saleh Abdullatif of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Makkah Region, was the chief guest, while Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), and Islamic Development Bank Vice president (Corporate Services) Ahmet Tiktik, were the guests of honor. A large number of officials, diplomats, businessmen and community members were present at the event.

Turkey conducts systematic programs for the underdeveloped and developing countries within its region, as well as those in the OIC to provide humanitarian, technical and economic aid. “We work toward assisting our brotherly countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Palestine, as well as all others during their difficult times. “Whether as a member of the UN Security Council or NATO, Turkey has been working toward world peace and security,” Sen said and emphasized that Turkey’s foreign policy was based on “The Great Ataturk’s words — Peace at Home, Peace in the World.”

He referred to the Eser-Onur-Nesma partnership that has successfully completed the KAUST infrastructure and said toward the end of the year Turkey’s largest bank, Ziraat Bankasi, would start operating in Jeddah. Also, a representative from Turkey’s largest news agency, Anadolu, has been appointed in Jeddah, and toward the end of the year the office of the Turkish commercial attaché and trade center would continue its operations from a new location on Tahlia Street.

The bilateral trade volume stands at $5.5, which remains in favor of the Kingdom due to Turkey’s large-scale import of oil and petroleum products, he said, adding that Turkish contracting companies like Guris, STFA, Ekol-Asdem, GAMA, Yuksel, MNG and Eser Onur were in the process of completing important projects in Jeddah as well as other regions of the Kingdom.

“We are gearing up to receive 100,000 pilgrims for this year’s Haj and all health precautions are being taken before they emplane for their annual pilgrimage,” Sen said."


http://www.arabnews.com/node/329531

[laperuzdfhami]

More info on turkish military deplyment to the syrian border. Could be getting ready for invasion inshAllah:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-defences.html

Wallahu a'lam

[Meerenuch]

There is a lot of truth in this post. Indeed the reality is everyone else is against us so Sunnis must stick together against the world be they Wahhabi or Traditional.

Just look at Syria. It is not just the Alawite Baathists who are murdering the Sunnis, but also gangs of Rafidites from Lebanon, Iraq and even soldiers from Iran. Yet some supposed Sunnis are still bizarelly fonder of the Rafidites than the Wahhabis.

Many Traditional Muslims get upset with the Saudis for destroying things they loved in the Holy Cities, for discouraging Sufism in their country and promoting Salafism everywhere they can,

but at the end of the day Muslims can either break up into little groups each pleased with what it has got and anger Allah and be easy pray for the enemies of Islam or they can stick together (overlook differences), please Allah and present a unitied front against the enemies of Islam.

Sadly most Muslims (at the moment) seem to be more attracted to the first option (sect-like seperation). Or maybe that is just the Muslims who shout loudest.

[toponlinecasinoer]

You have raised some good questions Abu Fatimah. Now restate the same in the form of an assertion.

[DrKirkNoliss]

Salaams. A question for the saudi hater/turkey lovers.

Don't you think that these two actually seem to be pretty strong allies to each other?

Wouldn't you in fact be criticising one of the nations which turkey has deemed to be a force for good and an ally in the world?

Turkey isnt shy to oppose nations that they dislike:

Salams. The problem with your thinking brother is that you cant accept criticism of Saudia it seems. Are you an indigenous or nationalistic SAudi citizen living abroad? No one hates saudia. We just critique some of its aspects. Hate is associated with malicious feelings, praying for ill on it. I am sure no one on this beautiful forum does that so dont get overly sensitive and defensive. Also no one says that Turkey hates saudia as far as I know. Maybe I missed some posts.

Regarding your other points, Turkey also has been developing great relations with non-Muslim countries. Its a globalized world and countries participate in partnerships. Moreover it also works with Israel jointly on many issues and relations are relatively ok as far as I know they are not terribly bad. They also allied with other non-Muslim nations and even recently Turks are doing immense goodwork in east africa. So Turks are generally a very pro-active on the ground people no matter what ills they might have.

Arabs always have viewed Turks with suspicion and have always thought they are better than them but the Turks have continued to surprise the Arbas and the rest of the world. They ruled the Muslims for 500 recent years and now anyone can see that the way things are progressing Turkey will end up leading the Muslim world again this century with the increasing religious sentiment in Turkey and with most Muslim countries seeing Turkey as an older brother. PAkistanis in particular as far as I know have immensely cordial relationships with Turks and I have seen pakistani and turkish comments on youtube especially always rejoicing about the great brotherhood between the two countries. Iran respects Turkey. Malaysia, indonesia sees great examples in Turkey.

To be honest I dont see saudis or saudia are any better than any other Muslim country like bangladesh or bengalis, Iraq and Iraqis, somalia and somalis, sudan and sudanis, afghanistan or pathans e.t.c. Thats why I dont know why you are comparing Saudia and Turkey. If malaysia and Turks are competing against one another thats fair comparison. The only reason people research saudia is that the holy cities of makkah and medina are there and its the land where Islam originated and initially strenghtened itself. In some of the earlier thread I stated saudia has good things like they are a charitable nation and do the hajj pretty well. I retract my later statement. I just read about how expensive hajj is for people and I read an article on hajj in majlis and felt sick.

http://www.themajlis.co.za/index.php...cles&Itemid=27

Different people have different reasons to critique saudia. I for one dont like how saudia is sometime presented as the most oppressive nation. In a recent ranking of 20 countries actually saudia did pretty well and was ranked 4th last for rights of women and India was last. So people got surprised in the west especially that saudia was not last. So we can see some improvement inshAllah.
SAudia is actually on the right track having a great king on the throne. But the ideology of repression of other groups, rights of women and what makes me parcticularly worried is an inherent superiority or prestige which Najdi Ulema or its supporters think they hold. That article on hajj is just nauseating and the way a previous user told that a family of four has to pay 30,000$ to go to Hajj is just plain wrong. Other than that saudia is doing good developing cities, granting education rights to women, developing infrastructure and King Abdullah I think is a very good man personally. I really like him. And no one can deny that saudia is charitable no matter how much they critique there other wrongs. O k bro, just relax - we are all trying to give our perspective on Muslim nations and how they can improve.

[Buyingtime]

but brother mubakr my question is 1) is it permissable to critique muslim rulers and 2) which scholars have preceeded you in this?

[AntonayPina]

also concerning turkish foreign policy, they have seriously strained relations with israel although now it is unwise to start fighting with them as they are unable to do this at the moment.

I would need to see evidence that the relationship between turkey and saudi is the same as turkey and israel though:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%...matic_conflict

Also turkeys efforts in syria would not agree with the claim taht they chill with everybody.

Allahu a'lam but I belive that friendly sunni governments seem to be building up in the muslim lands, developing their nations and building good ties inshAllah.

Now we have:

Saudi, Turkey, Indonesia, Malayisa, Egypt, Tunisia and others, all sunni governments with islam friendly rulers, and are moving forwards. Efforts are underway in syria at the moment to add it to that list inshAllah I believe.

inshAllah that is why we should change our attitude towards these lands and be supportive and help them grow stronger inshAllah and encourage unity between them inshAllah rather than nationalism or sectarianism

[Pypeassesty]

Oh and no im not arab im a muslimist inshAllah

a british convert by ethnicity but politically I support a realistic islamic unification and development, getting nations more islamic, governments more united and islam friendly, getting nations more developed and moving in an islamic direction, more cooperation between muslim states, stronger islamic identity amongst muslims etc inshAllah. This is my poitical ideology. But as realistic as possible so and EU style union might be more realistic than a total reunification of muslim lands. And we should forgive mistakes of rulers as long as they arent doing more harm than good like Assad. Some nation s need revolutions but not the ones like saudi, turkey, indonesia etc, only ones like syria, uzbekistan, kyrgistan etc where the rulers are proper anti islam

[bloriMal]

but brother mubakr my question is 1) is it permissable to critique muslim rulers and 2) which scholars have preceeded you in this?

Read this article first bro and accept that there are some major flaws. From the speed of your reply it seems you didnt read the article

http://www.themajlis.co.za/index.php...cles&Itemid=27

I support the Arab spring. I support Imam hussayn on the incident of Kerbala. I support Imam Hanbal against his khalif. There are innumerable examples of scholars themselves rebelling against rulers. Scholars against gaddafi, saddam, mubarak e.t.c. Islam is so varied and hetereogenous that one group can always claim it is following Islam and the rebelling group say no. In that sense your question has no sense. The saudi ruling monarchy seems to be democratic to me in that the SAudis like their rulers so who am I as an outsider to say Saudi rulers should be evicted. I am rubbish talk only then if I am arguing against a democratic aspiration of saudis. However more importantly Najdi ulema in my opinion have been the most sectarian ulema I have every experienced in Islamic history and their fatawas occassionally really push the buzzer. I have not seen one muslim group spared from their criticism and now the disease of sectarianism itself is universal in all factions. All groups now criticize other Muslim groups. Other than Harun Yahya group I dont see any group which avoids criticism of other Islamic groups. Harun Yahya is the only Muslim scholar who has not said anything harshly about wahhabis or shias.

[GenryDont]

Brother you have given me your ijtihad, so you are a "ghair muqalid" then who gives your own daleel rather than quoting ulama? Why cant you provide me with kibaar ulema who have encouraged spreading teh faults of the saudi government?

We have a clear hadeeth from the prophet SAW prohibbitting spreading the faults of rulers so if you want to go down teh road of us debating with daleel we can go there inshAllah but you are a hanafi so I had assumed you would be following hanafi ulema?

I'm not going to read the article because all it is doing is criticising saudi faults, I already know its not a perfect country, and teh same goes for all muslim lands, but some patience and understanding is needed to differentiate between when criticism is necessary and when it isnt

As this is a deobandi dominated forum I would request to know what the deobandi ulema have said inshAllah

[Z1IRo4Ap]

politically I support a realistic islamic unification and development, getting nations more islamic, governments more united and islam friendly, getting nations more developed and moving in an islamic direction, more cooperation between muslim states, stronger islamic identity amongst muslims etc inshAllah. This is my poitical ideology. But as realistic as possible so and EU style union might be more realistic than a total reunification of muslim lands. And we should forgive mistakes of rulers as long as they arent doing more harm than good like Assad. Some nation s need revolutions but not the ones like saudi, turkey, indonesia etc, only ones like syria, uzbekistan, kyrgistan etc where the rulers are proper anti islam

We are more or less on the same ideology inshAllah. Rulers have to be accountable, transparent and of utmost integrity however.

[stuck_in_WA]

Some narrations concerning obedience to rulers regardless of whether you like them or not:

[1]The Prophet Whosoever sees something from his leader of sin, then let him hate whatever occurs from sin. And let him not remove his hand from obedience, since whoever removes his hand from disobedience and splits off from the Jamaa’ah (united body), then he dies the death of Jaahiliyyah (pre-Islaamic times of ignorance).’’ Related by al-Bukhaaree (13/5) and Muslim (no. 1849)

[2] The Prophet said: ‘‘The person must obey in whatever he loves, and in whatever he hates, in ease and in hardship, in willingness and un-willingness; except if he is commanded to disobey Allaah. So if he is commanded to disobey Allaah, then he should not listen, not should he obey.’’ Related by al-Bukhaaree (4/203)

[3] The Companions asked him: O Messenger of Allaah! When you mentioned that there will be rulers, ‘you will approve of some things from them, and disapprove of others things.’ They said: So what do you command us to do? He said: ‘‘Give them their right, and invoke Allaah, since He is with you.’’ ’Ubaadah (radiyallaahu ’anhu) said: ‘‘We gave the oath of allegiance to the Messenger of Allaah that we would not oppose the command, not its people.’’ He said: ‘‘Except if you were to see clear disbelief (kufran bawaahan) about which you have a proof from Allaah.’’ Related by Muslim (6/17)

[4] ’Umar Ibn Yazeed said: I heard al-Hasan al-Basree during the days of Yazeed Ibnul-Mahlab, and there came to him a group of people. So he commanded them to stay in their houses and to close their doors. Then he said: ‘‘By Allaah! If the people had patience when they were being tested by their unjust ruler, it will not be long before Allaah will make a way out for them. However, they always rush for their swords, so they are left to their swords. By Allaah! Not even for a single say did they bring about any good.’’ It is related by Ibn Sa’d in at-Tabaqaat (8/164), and by Ibn Abee Haatim in his Tafseer (3/178).

[5] Imaam as-Suyootee said in al-Ishbaah wan-Nadhaa‘ir (p. 87): ‘‘Preventing mafsadah (harm) is given precedence over procuring maslahah (benefit).’’ And Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H) - rahimahullaah - said in al-Hisbah fil-Islaam (p. 124): ‘‘Ordering the good should not result in the loss of a greater good, nor cause a greater evil (than before). Likewise, forbidding the evil should not result in a greater evil, nor in the loss of a greater good.’’

[6] Imaam Aboo Bark al-Aajurree (d.360H) - rahimahullaah - said: ‘‘It is not permissible for the one who sees the uprising of a khaarijee who has revolted against the leader, whether he is just or oppressive - so this person has revolted and gathered a group behind him, has pulled out his sword and has made lawful the killing of Muslims - it is not fitting for the one who sees this, that he becomes deceived by this person’s recitation of the Qur‘aan, the length of his standing in Prayer, nor his constant fasting, nor his good and excellent words in knowledge when it is clear to him that this person’s way and methodology is that of the Khawaarij.’’ Refer to ash-Sharee’ah (p. 28).

[7] Imaam ’Abdur-Rahmaan Ibn Naasir as-Sa’dee (d.1376H) - rahimahullaah - said: ‘‘As for advice to the imaams of the Muslims - and they are their leaders; from the main leader to the ministers and judges, to everyone who is appointed over them with a general or specific type of leadership - then it is to believe (i’taqad) in their leadership, and to listen to and obey them. And it entails invoking the people to do likewise, and to strive according to that which is feasible to guide them. And it is to inform them of everything that benefits them and benefits the people, and to the establishment of their obligation.’’ Refer to Bahjatul-Quloobil-Abraar (p. 19).

[8] Imaam Ibn Abil-’Izz (d.729H) – rahimahullaah – said: “We do not say about a particular individual from amongst the people of the Qiblah, that he is from the people of Paradise, or from the people of the Fire, except about those whom the truthful has informed about, that he is from amongst the people of Paradise, such as the ten who were given glad tidings of Paradise, may Allaah be pleased with them. And if we say that whomsoever Allaah wishes to enter into the Hellfire, from amongst the people who commit major sins will – by necessity – enter the Hellfire, and that he will be brought out of the Hellfire by the intercession of those who are entitled to intercede, then we would refrain from attributing this to a specific individual. So we do not testify for him that he will enter Paradise, nor that he will enter the Hellfire, except due to knowledge, because the reality is hidden, and what an individual dies upon cannot be encompassed by us. However, we do hope for those who do good, and we fear for those who do evil.’’ Refer to Sharhul-’Aqeedatit-Tahaawiyyah (p. 378).

[9] Imaam Ibn Abee ’Aasim said in Kitaabus-Sunnah (2/251): ‘‘Chapter: How are the leaders of the common-folk to be advised?’’ And he related: From Shurayh Ibn ’Ubayd al-Hadramee and other than him who said: ’Iyaad Ibn Ghunm was whipping a person of a land which was conquered. So Hishaam Ibn Hakeem spoke harshly with him, until ’Iyaad became angry. So he stayed the night (like this) through the night, then he came to Hishaam Ibn Hakeem and sought an excuse from him. Then Hishaam said to ’Iyaad: Have you not heard the Prophet saying: “Verily the person who shall suffer the severest punishment is the one who is most severe in punishing the people in this world.’’ So ’Iyaad Ibn Ghunm said: “O Hishaam Ibn Hakeem! Indeed we have heard what you have heard, but you have not heard the statement of the Messenger of Allaah : “Whosoever wishes to advise the ruler concerning a matter, then let him not do it openly. Rather, he should take him by the hand and take him into seclusion. So if he accepts his advice, then he has achieved his objective, and if he does not accept from him, then he has still conveyed that which was a duty upon him.” And verily you – O Hishaam – are a reckless fool – therefore, you dare to come out against the ruler of Allaah. So why are you not scared that you may be killed by the ruler, so you will be one who was killed by the ruler of Allaah the Blessed and Exalted?!” In addition to Ibn Abee ’Aasim, this hadeeth was also related by Ahmad (3/403), and it was authenticated by Shaykh al-Albaanee in Dhilaalul-Jannah fee Takhreejis-Sunnah (no. 1096).

[10] Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (d.241H) – rahimahullaah – said: “Verily I supplicate for the ruler, for his correctness, success and support – night and day – and I see this as being obligatory upon me.’’ Refer to as-Sunnah (no. 14) of Aboo Bakr al-Khallaal.

[11] Imaam Maalik Ibn Anas (d.179H) – rahimahullaah – said: “The right of every Muslim whom Allaah has blessed with something of knowledge and understanding (fiqh), is that he enters upon the ruler to command him with goodness, and to prohibit him from evil, and to admonish him.” Refer to Tarteebul-Madaarik (1/207-208) of al-Qaadee ’Iyaad. Ibn Abee Haatim relates in al-Jarh wat-Ta’deel (1/30) from Imaam Maalik, that it was said to him: ‘Verily you enter upon the ruler whilst they (the people) are being oppressed (by the ruler)!’ So Maalik said: “May Allaah have mercy upon you! So where is the person who will speak with the truth?! Indeed the Messenger of Allaah said: “The most excellent Jihaad is a truthful word spoken to an oppressive ruler.” The hadeeth was related by Ibn Maajah (no. 4012), and Ahmad (5/251); and it was authenticated by Shaykh al-Albaanee in Saheehul-Jaami’ (no. 1100).

[12] From Yazeed Ibn Kusayb al-’Adawee who said: I was with Abee Bakrah under the pulpit of Ibn ’Aamir, and he was giving a sermon, and he was wearing fine clothes. So Aboo Bilaal said: Look at our leader wearing the clothes of the sinners! So Aboo Bakrah said: Be silent, I heard the Messenger say: “Whosoever holds contempt for the ruler of Allaah upon the earth, then Allaah will hold contempt for him.” This is an authentic hadeeth related by at-Tirmidhee (no. 1812). Imaam adh-Dhahabee says in Siyar A’laamun-Nubalaa (14/508): “This Aboo Bilaal is Mirdaas Ibn Udiyyah, a khaarijee. And from his ignorance is that he counts the man who wears fine clothes as being from amongst those who wear the clothes of sinners.”

[13] Sa’eed Ibn Jumhaan said: ‘I came to ’Abdullaah Ibn Abee Awfaa and his eyes were covered, so I greeted him. He said to me: Who are you? So I said: I am Sa’eed Ibn Jumhaan He said: So what was done with your father? I said: The Azaariqah (followers of Naafi’ Ibnul-Azraq al-Khaarijee) killed him. He said: May Allaah curse the Azaariqah! May Allaah curse the Azaariqah! The Messenger of Allaah has informed us that they are the ‘dogs of the Hellfire.’ He said: So I said: The Azaariqah alone, or all of the Khawaarij? He said: Yes, all of the Khawaarij. He said: So I said: Verily the ruler is oppressing the people and affecting them. He said: So give him your hand, and connect your hand to his firmly. Then he said: “Woe to you O Ibn Jumhaan! Stick to the Suwaadul-A’dtham, stick to the Suwaadul-A’dtham! If the ruler will listen to you, then go to his house and inform him of what you know. So he may accept from you, but if not, then leave him; since you do not know more than him.’’’ This incident was reported by Ahmad (4/3272-372), it was authenticated by Shaykh al-Albaanee in Dhilaalul-Jannah (no. 508). ’Abdullaah Ibn Ahmad (d.290H) – rahimahullaah – with an authentic chain of narrators going back to Sa’eed Ibn Jumhaan who said: “The Khawaarij used to call upon me, until I was about to enter along with them. So I saw the sister of Aboo Bilaal in a dream, where Aboo Bilaal was a black hairy dog, and his eyes were filled with tears. He said: So she said: You are with my father O Abaa Bilaal! What is it from your affairs that I see you like this? He said: ‘‘After you, we were made into dogs of the Fire.’’ And Aboo Bilaal was from amongst the leaders of the Khawaarij.’’ Refer to as-Sunnah (no. 1509).

[14] Fudayl Ibn ’Iyaad (d.187H) – Rahimahullaah – said: “If I had a supplication that would be answered, I would not make it, except for the ruler. Because when the ruler becomes righteous, the towns and the servants become safe and secure.” Refer to Hilyatul-Awliyaa‘ (8/91-92).

Ibn al Mubaarak Rahimahullaah said (in reference to the above saying of al-Fudayl), "O teacher of goodness, who would show boldness towards this besides you?"

[15] Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar (d.852H) – Rahimahullaah – said in Fathul-Baaree (1/138): “The advice to the leaders of the Muslims is to aid them upon that by which they will become established. And it is to warn them against negligence, and to correct their deficiency when they slip, and to unite the word upon them, and to reject the hearts that have enmity towards them. And the greatest advice is to prevent them – by using that which is good – from oppression.”

[16] The Prophet said: ‘‘There are three things towards which the heart of a Muslim never shows hatred or rancour: Making one’s action sincerely for Allaah; giving obedience to the rulers (wulaatul-umoor); and sticking to the Jamaa’ah (united body). Since their supplication encompasses those who are behind them (i.e. those whom they rule over).’’ This narration was related by Ahmad (4/80), and at-Tirmidhee (no. 2567), and it was authenticated by al-Haythamee in al-Majma’uz-Zawaa‘id (1/137).

[17]The Prophet said, “Listen and obey, even if the ruler seizes you and beats your back.” Related by Muslim (6/19) So it is obligatory to obey the ruler of the Muslims in obedience to Allaah, but if he commands disobedience (to Allaah), then he is not to be obeyed in this command, meaning: in the command of disobedience. However, he is still to be obeyed in other than that, from that which does not involve sin. As for dealing with the disbelieving (kaafir) ruler, then this differs depending upon the various situations. So if the Muslims have the power and capability to fight him, and to remove him from rule, and a Muslim ruler is present, then that is obligatory upon them, and this is from Jihaad in the Path of Allaah. As for when they are not capable of opposing him, then it is not permissible for them to instigate anything by oppression and disbelief, because this will result in harm and affliction upon the Muslims.

The Prophet stayed in Makkah for thirteen years and the government there was a disbelieving government. Despite this, whoever accepted Islaam from his Companions did not fight against the disbelievers. Rather, they were prohibited from fighting the disbelievers for this extremely long period of time, except after the Prophet migrated and a state was established and a community arose making them capable of fighting the disbelievers, this is the methodology of Islaam.

So when the Muslims are under a kaafir government, and they are not capable of removing it, then they must hold firmly onto Islaam and their ’aqeedah. However, they should not endanger themselves by endeavouring to oppose the disbelievers, because that will only result in the destruction and annihilation of the da’wah (call). As for when they have power (quwwah) making them capable of Jihaad, then they should perform jihaad in the Path of Allaah upon the known Sharee’ah fundamentals.”

“Power is known, so if you can carry out an action, and the Muslims start to become capable of establishing jihaad in the Path of Allaah, then jihaad has been legislated for them against the disbelievers. As for when their power is estimated, and not fully certain, then it is not permissible to endanger the Muslims, nor to urge them towards danger; thus taking them towards and end that is not praiseworthy. And the seerah (biographical account) of the Prophet in Makkah and al-Madeenah is an excellent witness to this.”

[17] Imaam Maalik Ibn Anas used to say, “The latter part of this Ummah will not be corrected, except by that which corrected its first part.” Related in ash-Shifaa‘ of al-Qaadee ’Iyaad (2/676). Al-Haafidh al-Khateeb al-Baghdaadee said: “When the Messenger of Allaah passed away, the Muslims were upon one way in regards to the fundamentals of the Religion and its details, except those who outwardly displayed agreement, but concealed hypocrisy.” Refer to al-Farq baynal-Firaq (p. 14).

[18] Imaam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal relates in az-Zuhd (p. 48), and ad-Daarimee in as-Sunan (1/91): From ’Umar Ibn ’Abdul-’Azeez that he said: “If you see a people discussing anything of their Religion in secrecy, to the exclusion of the people in general, then know that they are upon the foundation of misguidance.” Ibnul-Jawzee said in Talbees Iblees (p. 89): “So our Religion, all praise being for Allaah, is clear and manifest, containing nothing hidden, nor anything concealed, suppressed, nor secret. So whatever the people of partisanship employ from that, then it is the door to misguidance, and refuge is sought from Allaah.”

[19] Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H) – rahimahullaah – said, “Indeed the people of the truth and the Sunnah do not follow anyone, except the Messenger of Allaah – the one who does not speak from his desires – it is only revelation revealed to him. They hold that belief in all that he narrated is obligatory, as is obedience in all that he commanded. This rank is not given to anyone other than him from the imaams. Rather, statements of every individual are taken or left, except the Messenger of Allaah So whoever makes other than the Messenger of Allaah a criterion, such that whoever loves him and stands by him becomes from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, and whoever opposes him becomes from the people of innovation, and differing – as is found in the groups following the leaders of kalaam (theological rhetoric) with regards to the Religion – then he is from the people of innovation, misguidance and division!”

[20] Hudhaifah (ra) reports that the Messenger of Allaah (saw) said "There will come leaders who will not follow my guidance and will not follow my sunnah. There will be amongst them men who will have the hearts of devil and bodies of humans." He (Hudhaifah asked) "What shall I do, o Messenger of Allaah if I reach that?" He replied, "you should hear and obey the ruler even if he flogs your backs and takes your wealth, then still hear and obey." Reported by Muslim (Eng. trans Vol 3/1029/34554)

[21]Narrated Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman: "Subay' ibn Khalid said: I came to Kufah at the time when Tustar was conquered. I took some mules from it. When I entered the mosque (of Kufah), I found there some people of moderate stature, and among them was a man whom you could recognize when you saw him that he was from the people of Hijaz. I asked: Who is he? The people frowned at me and said: Do you not recognize him? This is Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman, the companion of the Apostle of Allaah (peace_be_upon_him). Then Hudhayfah said: People used to ask the Apostle of Allaah (peace_be_upon_him) about good, and I used to ask him about evil. Then the people stared hard at him. He said: I know the reason why you dislike it. I then asked: Apostle of Allaah, will there be evil as there was before, after this good which Allaah has bestowed on us? He replied: Yes. I asked: Wherein does the protection from it lie? He replied: In the sword. I asked: Apostle of Allaah, what will then happen? He replied: If Allaah has on Earth a caliph who flays your back and takes your property, obey him, otherwise die holding onto the stump of a tree. I asked: What will come next? He replied: Then the Antichrist (Dajjaal) will come forth accompanied by a river and fire. He who falls into his fire will certainly receive his reward, and have his load taken off him, but he who falls into his river will have his load retained and his reward taken off him. I then asked: What will come next? He said: The Last Hour will come. (Translation of Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 35, Trials and Fierce Battles (Kitab Al-Fitan Wa Al-Malahim), Number 4232)"

[22] Imam al Barbahaaree (d. 329H) said, "Whoever rebels against a Muslim ruler is one of the Khawaarij, has caused dissent within the Muslims, has contradicted the narrations and has died the death of the days of ignorance." (Sharhus-Sunnah [p.42])

The Khawaarij are a group who first appeared in the time of 'Alee (radiallaahu'anhu). They split from his army and began the grave innovation of takfeer (i.e. declaring Muslims, rulers or the ruled who are guilty of major sins, to be disbelievers). The Prophet MUHAMMAD (salallaahu'alayheewasallam) warned against them in many authentic Ahaadeeth, "The Khawaarij are the dogs of Hellfire." (Reported by Ahmad and it is Saheeh.)

MUHAMMAD (salallaahu'alayheewasallam) also informed us that they would continue to appear until the end of this world, saying, "A group will appear reciting the Qur'an, it will not pass beyond their throats, every time a group appears it will be cut off, until the Dajjal appears within them." (Reported by Ibn Maajah and it is Hasan.)

Al Barbahaaree (d. 329H) also said, "It is not permissible to fight the ruler or rebel against him even if he oppresses. This is due to the saying of the Messenger of Allah (salallaahu'alayheewasallam) to Abu Dharr al Ghifaaree, "Have patience, even if he (i.e. the Ameer) is an Abyssinian slave," (Reported by Muslim.)

PROPHET MUHAMMAD (salallaahu'alayheewasallam) saying to the Ansaar, "Have patience until you meet me at the Pool," (Reported by Bukharee from Usayd ibn Hudayr.)

[23] Ibn al Qayyim (d. 751H) said in Miftaah Daaris Sa'aadah (1/119), "And as for Imam Maalik, then Ibn al Qaasim said, "I heard Maalik say, 'Indeed there are a people who desire worship but squander the Knowledge (being deprived of it) so they revolt against the Ummah of Muhammad (salallaahu'alayheewasallam) with their swords. And if they had followed the Knowledge, then it would have prevented them from doing that."

[24] Shaykh Abdul Azeez Ibn Baaz, (hafidhahullaah) was asked, "Is it from the Manhaj (methodology) of the Salaf to criticise the Rulers from the mimbar (the pulpit)? And what is the Manhaj of the Salaf with respect to advising the Rulers? "He responded: "It is not from the Manhaj of the Salaf to publicise the faults of the Rulers and to mention such things from the pulpit because that leads to confusion/disorder and the absence of hearing and obeying the ruler in what is good. It also results in (the people) becoming engrossed (with these matters, arguing and debating) which causes harm and produces no benefit.

The followed Path with the Salaf, however is to give naseehah (advice) with respect to the matters which are between themselves and the leader, writing to him or by reaching him through the scholars who keep in touch with him (to advise him) until the ruler is directed towards the good. Repelling the evil occurs without mentioning the doer of the evil.

So fornication, drinking of intoxicants and the taking of usury are curbed without mentioning the one who does such things. Warding off the evil and warning and the people against it is sufficient without it being mentioned that such and such a person does it, whether he is a ruler or other than the ruler.

And when the fitnah occurred in the time of 'Uthmaan Gani (radiallaahu'anhu), some of the people said to Usaamah ibn Zaid (radiallaahu'anhu), "Will you not speak to 'Uthmaan?" So he replied, "You think that I will not talk to him without letting you know about it (also). Indeed, I will certainly talk to him regarding that which concerns me and him without initiating a matter which I do not love to be the first to initiate."

And when they (the Khawaarij) opened up the evil in the time of 'Uthmaan (radiallaahu'anhu) and rejected 'Uthmaan openly, the fitnah, the killing and the mischief, which has not ceased to affect the people to this day, was brought about. And this caused the fitnah to occur between 'Alee and Mu'aawiyyah and 'Uthmaan (radiallaahu'anhu) was killed for these reasons.

(Futhermore) a large number of Companions and others besides them were killed due to this open rebellion and the open proclamation of the faults (of the ruler), until the people began to hate the one charged with authority over them and killed him. We ask Allah for success." [These were the words of the Shaykh Abdul Azeez Ibn Baaz, (hafidhahullaah). Taken from Al-Ma'loom min Waajib il-'Ilaaqah bain al Haakim wal-Mahkoom, (pp. 22-23).]

It is authentically reported from the Messenger of Allah Muhammad (salallaahu'alayheewasallam) in the Ahaadeeth of 'Iyaad Ibn Ghunum who said, "The Messenger of Allaah Muhammad (salallaahu'alayheewasallam) said, "Whoever desires to advise the one with authority then he should not do so openly, rather he should take him by the hand and take him into seclusion (and then advise him). And if he accepts (the advice) from him then (he has achieved his objective) and if not, then he has fulfilled that which was a duty upon him." (Reported by Ahmad (3/403) and Ibn Abee 'Aasim (2/521) with a Saheeh isnaad.)

When changing the evil of the rulers, then this should be done by the scholars and not openly as is mentioned by a clear Ahaadeeth of the Prophet (salallaahu'alayheewasallam), "When you wish to correct the sultan then take him by the hand in secret and advise him." [Aqeedah at Tahawiyah]

There is no fighting against the ruler in the Sunnah. It causes destruction of the Religion and the worldly affairs."
[Sharhus-Sunnah, (p. 43).]

[25] It is also related by Ibn Sa'ad in Tabaqaatul Kubraa (7/163-165) A group of Muslims came to al Hasan al Basree (d. 110H) seeking a verdict to rebel against al Hajjaaj [3]. So they said, "O Abu Sa'eed! What do you say about fighting this oppressor who has unlawfully spilt blood and unlawfully taken wealth and did this and that?"
So al Hasan said, "I hold that he should not be fought. If this is the punishment from Allah (Ta'aala), then you will not be able to remove it with your swords. If this is a trial from Allah (Ta'aala), then be patient until Allah's Judgement comes, and He is the best of Judges."

So they left Al Hasan, disagreed with him and rebelled against al Hajjaaj - so al Hajjaaj killed them all.

Hajjaaj wasath Thaqafee, and is well known. Adh Dhahabee said in Siyar A'lamin Nubalaa (4/343) at the end of his biography, "We revile him and do not love him, rather we hate him for Allah (Ta'aala). He had some good deeds, but they are drowned in the ocean of his sins, and his affair is for Allah!"

About them al Hasan used to say, "If the people had patience, when they were being tested by their unjust ruler, it will not be long before Allah (Ta'aala) will give them a way out. However, they always rush for their swords, so they are left to their swords. By Allah! Not even for a single day did they bring about any good."

The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said, "People should give up their pride in nations because that is a Coal from the Coals of Hell-Fire." (Abu Dawud & Tirmidhi)

The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said, "He is not one of us who calls for asabiyyah, (nationalism) or who fights for asabiyyah or who dies for asabiyyah." (Abu Dawud)

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "The Muslim Ummah is a unique Ummah among the whole of mankind: Their Land is one, their War is one, their Peace is one, their Honor is one and their Trust is one." (Ahmed)

The Messenger of Allah SAW said, "The best of generations is my generation (Sahaabah), then those who come after them (Taabi'oon) and then those who come after them (Atba' at-Taabi'oon)"

A man came to al-Hasan [al-Basri] (d.110H) and said, "I wish to debate with you about the Religion." Al-Hasan replied, "I know my Religion. If you have lost your Religion go out and look for it!" [Sahih in Ibn Battah]

[arcaniagainee]

We are more or less on the same ideology inshAllah. Rulers have to be accountable, transparent and of utmost integrity however.

this contradicts the many narrations I just provided akhi

[Indoendris]

Brother you have given me your ijtihad, so you are a "ghair muqalid" then who gives your own daleel

Thats childish talk. I am giving you great legacies of Muslim scholars who rebelled against rulers to your generic question. And why do you keep on persistingly mis-intepreting what I say. Where have I ever promoted that Saudi leadership be rebelled against? I support the Arab spring, I support the examples of great Muslims who rebelled against rulers. And I have clearly mentioned that Saudis are happy with their rulers so I am no one to interfere in their governance and I also remarked how good King Abdullah is. Whats your issue bro? I was just arguing against you when you were comparing Turkey and Saudia and placing it on the same footing when clearly I think Turkey is the better country and that the two countries cant be compared. Saudia should learn from Turkey and acknowledge subservience to It in scientific, economic, social departments. Infact I think they should let the administrative affairs of mecca, medina and the Hajj in general be done by the AKP.

[Green_Monkey23]

come on bro thats about as realistic as saying I think all muslim lands should be lumped together into one big khilafaah under one emir.

Im not suggesting saudi is "better" than turkey, Im merely suggesting that both are forces for good and deserve our support inshAllah

Im not trying to be childish I genuinely dont understand why people scream blue murder over salafis making ijtihad but then seem to also go right ahead and do so when it suits them. It seems that the taqleed vs qur'an and sunnah debate is over semantics as the difference between the two groups seems quite small

[HBPujWBe]

No honestly Turkey will do a better job organizing Hajj for the Muslim Ummah. They should divert the Hajj administration to the Turkish republic.


Concerning all your narrations, I will filter through all of them and read them carefully and I am sure you can search for many scholars who support rebellion of such and such a ruler. Can Muslims rebel against the ruler? AS I said your question has no meaning. Every social setting now or historically will be different and thus the question is too broad to be answered directly. And I have given you example where millions of Muslim rebeled against their rulers in the Arab spring. I am sure you are would have been one of the passive ideologues against the overthrow of Gaddafi, Sadam, Ben Ali, Saleh and the other lot from the way I read your posts. None openly rebelled against ISlam. The people who rebelled against their leadership thought they are deviantMuslims. Every ruler will be seen by some of its populace as deviants, oppressors or tyrants and thus justify their overthrow.

Other general information
http://harunyahya.com/en/works/14773...man_model_come

[Eujacwta]

I support the revolutions bro, I consider ben ali, qaddafi, assad and the likes to be kuffar and it is waajib to remove them inshAllah.

Ia m asking you in our times, which ulema have given us teh goahead to criticise saudi as a nation?

Feel free to go through the narrations inshAllah and also provide names of deobandi ulema who have encouraged criticism of saudi in our age

I dont think turkey running hajj will ever happen and suggetsing it is unconstructive to be honest bro

[Cogebrego]

Btw imam ahmad ibn hanbal rh never revolted against the rulers, he refused to obey them in a command they gave which he deemed to be against the shariah and this is accepted that if the ruler commands you to disobey Allah you shouldn't do it, its not the same as revolting against teh ruler or criticising them

[AXGreg]

and turkey isnt without faults either, the point is there is a lot of good and they should be supported in taht inshAllah

[dupratac]

. A question for the saudi hater/turkey lovers.

Current nation states in Islamic world are made of European model of power and politics.It is not good for a moomeen to get excited with these governments or their politics. if you do that soon your excitment will be dissapointment.It is money and influence that make turky to kiss isreal and talk taugh about syria.Or saudis to follow such a humiliating foreign polics in muslim world. Men of faith see only Allah and good of his religion. These governments will fail anyone who become their sympatizer. any of these nationalistic governments, If they do a good action praise their action but not the government. leave a place in your mind for iuslamic khilafah where faith and deen will be the order of the government and people. The government and people will serve Allah SWT . not the stomach of all these redicioulous nationalities. Sadly every ignorant who is nationalistic thinks his nation is better than any other. We say Allah u akbar