Skip to main content

Author: Abdullah Jallow

The Danger of Rebellion, Especially From Within: The Plight of Sultan ʿAbdul-Ḥamīd

In Turkey, secularism was established after the downfall of the Ottoman Empire under the leadership of Ataturk. Despite his outward display of religious devotion, such as praying in front of soldiers and flattering scholars, Ataturk had a hidden agenda. Once he achieved his goals, he executed his vile plan. He separated Turkey from the rest of the lands under Ottoman rule, declared secularism, banned the call to prayer and prayers in Arabic, enforced the adoption of European clothing instead of Islamic dress, abolished Shariah courts, replaced the Hijri date with the Gregorian date, prohibited polygyny and equated inheritance between the two biological sexes (males and females), eliminated Islamic education, banned the teaching of the Quran, and replaced the Arabic script with Latin letters.

He played a role in overthrowing Sultan Abdul Hameed II, rahimahullah, and facilitated the opportunity for some Zionists to acquire land in Palestine. The Zionist movement had already begun to show its presence before the initial gathering of its devoted supporters in 1897, which alarmed the Sultan. So, he took precautionary measures. In 1871, he declared 80 percent of Palestine as state-owned property to prevent the the purchase of any land there. Then, in May 1901, those specific Zionists proposed to pay off the foreign debts of the Ottomans and promote the Ottoman Sultan’s interests in Europe in exchange for allowing settlements in Palestine. However, the Sultan rejected this offer in both 1901 and 1902, even though the Ottoman Empire had the largest Jewish population in the world at that time, with Jews living freely in the city of Thessaloniki. Thereafter, those specific Zionists (not all Jews) conspired with some young Turks to overthrow the sultan, as the Sultan himself declared on September 22nd, 1913:

“I abdicate the throne due to the oppression and threats from the Young Turks. This faction demanded my approval for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine, which I refused. They even offered 150 million British gold pieces, which I also declined, stating that I would never agree, even if you offer 150 million British gold pieces, rather not even if you offer all the gold in the world. Following my firm stance, they deposed me from power. I am grateful to Allah for not agreeing to establish a new state on Palestinian lands within the Ottoman State and the Islamic community”. [a]

The Sultan was subsequently confined in Thessaloniki at the residence of a Zionist banker named Allatini. The Young Turks then forged a strong alliance with those Zionists as they assisted in the Sultan’s overthrow. A prominent Zionist banker named Emmanuel Carasso, who was an associate of Talat Pasha, a member of the delegation that delivered the news of Sultan’s removal from power, played a pivotal role in organising the migration to Palestine.

In 1917, an agreement was reached between the British Empire and certain individuals, leading to the approval of the creation of a Jewish nation-state in Palestine. Following the defeat of the Ottoman army in Syria, Palestine came under British occupation in 1918. Subsequently, the lands previously under the authority of Sultan Abdul Hamid and taken over by the Young Turks were transferred to British control. During this period of British rule, the number of Jewish  settlements in Palestine grew, and they were permitted to purchase land. Due to economic hardships, many Arabs were compelled to sell their lands, having previously enjoyed prosperity under Sultan Abdul Hameed II. By 1947, over half of the Palestinian population was living in areas occupied by those who purchased these lands. The path to independence began with Zionist groups pressuring the British to depart, leading to the United Nations’ approval for the establishment of a Jewish state in 1948. [Risaalah Fil Adyaan Wal-Firaq Wal-Madhaahib. page 486-487]

[a] This quote is from a Turkish Newspaper

If you see a man supplicating for or against the ruler

Imam Al-Barbahaaree, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

“And if you see a man supplicating against the ruler, then know that he is a person of desires (deviant inclinations). And if you see a man supplicating for the ruler’s righteousness, then know that he is a person of the Sunnah, if Allah wills.” (1)

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

“I hold that the leader of the believers is to be obeyed (in good) in private and public, in my times of hardship and ease, in my times of enthusiasm and when I dislike doing something (i.e. something that’s not unlawful, but one does not like to do it, however he must do it in obedience to the ruler), and when others are given precedence over me. Indeed, I supplicate to Allah – night and day – for him to be successful and guided”. [2]

Abdus Samad Bin Yazid Al-Baghdadi, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: I heard Al-Fudayl Bin Iyaad, may Allah have mercy upon him, saying, “If I had a supplication that would be accepted, I would not make it except for the leader”. It was said to him, “O father of Ali! Why is that?” He said, “When I make it for myself, it would be only for me, but if I make it for the leader, the rectification (or righteousness) of the leader would consequently result in the rectification of the people and the country”. It was said to him, “O father of Ali! How is that? Explain this to us”. He said, “As for the wellbeing of the land, if the people are safe from the ruler’s tyranny, they will develop abandoned areas and settle in the land. And with regards to the rectification of the people, one observes the affair of a people among the ignoramuses and says, ‘They have been distracted by the pursuit of livelihood rather than seeking what will benefit them with regards to learning the Qur’an and other things’. So, he gathers them together in a house – fifty in number, less or more, and says to a man, ‘You have what will make your affair upright and teach these people their religion’. Then you’ll see what Allah, The Mighty and Majestic, brings forth from among them that would make the land righteous (and prosperous, thrive, flourish, etc) and that would return to them (i.e. they’ll receive its benefits). This would be the rectification of the people and the country”. Imam Ibn Al-Mubarak, may Allah have mercy upon him, kissed Imam Fudayl’s forehead and said, “O teacher of goodness! Who else (i.e. among us) would be able to (say or do) this better than you?!” [3]


[1] Sharh As-Sunnah 127

[2] Al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah 14/413

[3] Hilyah Al-Awliya 8/91

Khuruj Principle of a Student of Knowledge Uprooted and Demolished by Imam Muhammad Ibn Salih Al-Uthaymin

Question: One of the students of knowledge says that it is permissible to make Khuruj against a sinful ruler, but with two conditions: firstly, the ability to do so and secondly being certain that the harm will be lesser than the benefit, and he says that this is the methodology of the pious predecessors…..

The beautiful response of the Imam, rahimahullah, here:

The Imam, may Allah have mercy upon him, also said:

Regardless of the type of fusuq, it is not permissible to revolt against the rulers. Whatever it may be, even if they kill, drink alcohol, commit adultery, or engage in sodomy, it is not permissible to rebel against them, because the Messenger said [that rebellion is only justified upon seeing] “clear, manifest disbelief” (kufran bawāhan): something explicit and unambiguous, leaving no room for interpretation or doubt.

For if the matter is open to interpretation or doubt, then perhaps those who committed what appears to be manifest disbelief did so out of ignorance or through an erroneous interpretation. For this reason, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him, said in his al-Risālah al-Mardīniyyah that Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, held that the doctrine of al-Ma’mun and those like him that the Qur’an is created is disbelief. Yet he did not declare al-Ma’mun himself to be a disbeliever; rather, he would supplicate for him and ask Allah to have mercy upon him.

This is what Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him, said. Therefore, it must be manifest and unequivocal, with no possibility of interpretation, ignorance, or anything similar. (Paraphrased)

https://alathar.net/home/esound/index.php?op=codevi&coid=30545

Demonstrations, and Revolting Against Rulers – By Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Mad’khali

Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Mad’khali, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

فإن الإسلام لِكمال هديه وكمال حِكمته يمنع الخروج على الحكام وما

يؤدي إلى الخروج، ويأمر بالنصيحة والموعظة الحسنة النافعة بالطرق

الحكيمة البعيدة عن الإفساد والمفاسد

For indeed, Islam – due to the perfection of its guidance and wisdom, prohibits revolting against rulers and that which leads to revolt. It commands sincere advice, fine, beneficial admonition, through wise methods that are far removed from Ifsaad (causing corruption) and Fasaad (corruption).

كلمة عن الأحداث والمظاهرات والخروج على الحكام

كلمة عن الأحداث والمظاهرات والخروج على الحكام.

Sincere Advisers of Modest Disposition Who Know How to Counsel Rulers in Private

Sufyan Bin Uyaynah, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

When Umar bin Abdil Aziz, may Allah have mercy upon him, was appointed the khaleefah, he reached out to Muhammad Bin Kab, Rajaa Bin Haywah, and Salim Bin Abdillah, may Allah have mercy upon them, saying: “You witness the trial I face and it has fallen upon me, therefore, what do you advise?”

Muhammad Bin Kab said, “Regard the elderly as your own father, treat the youth as your brother, and care for the young ones as your own children; therefore, be good to your father, maintain strong bonds with your brother, and be compassionate towards your child”.

Rajaa said, “Wish for the people what you wish for yourself, detest for them what you detest for yourself, and interact with them in a manner that you would appreciate in return.”

Salim said, “Focus on one matter by diminishing the desires of worldly life and let your natural inclination lead you to contemplate death.” Umar proclaimed, “Laa Hawla Walaa Quwwata Illaa Billaah”. [1]

Imam Abdul Azeez Bin Baaz, may Allah have mercy upon him, was asked: “The worst scholars are those who approach (visit) the rulers”. What is the level of authenticity of this hadith?

Response: I do not know about its authenticity, and if it were authentic, then it would imply an evil visit. If it is authentic, then it signifies a visit driven by vain desires, material wealth, and alignment with falsehood.

(But), if the scholars neglect the rulers, they will become corrupt. If the scholars neglect the rulers and isolate them, the state of affairs will become corrupted, and the rights of the people will be violated. Therefore, goodness and Maslahah (i.e. what will bring about welfare and repel harm) is that the scholars visit and guide the rulers, and the rulers seek Tawjeeh (guidance) from them, Irshaad (the upright path to follow in all affairs), advise them regarding the avoidance of injustice, support the oppressed, and prevention of injustice against them, just as the scholars -from the time of the companions to the present day ours- visit them.

As for the scholars abandoning and boycotting the rulers, and not visiting them, this is wrong – a blunder, and only those who do not know public welfare would suggest such a course of action. [paraphrased] [2]


[1] An Excerpt from Al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah. Vol 9. Pages 193-202. Publisher: Maktabah Al-Ma’aarif and Daar ibn Hazm. 9th Edition. 1414 AH (1994)

[2]

ما صحة حديث: شرار العلماء الذين يأتون إلى الأمراء؟

الجواب:

ما أعرف له صحة، ولو صح فالمقصود زيارتهم الخبيثة، لو صح، فالمراد بالزيارة التي للشهوة، والمال، والموافقة على الباطل.

وإذا أهمل العلماء الأمراء؛ فسدوا، إذا أهمل العلماء الأمراء، وانزووا عنهم؛ فسد الأمر، وضاعت الحقوق، فالمصلحة، والخير في أن يزورهم العلماء، ويرشدوهم، ويطلبوا منهم التوجيه، والإرشاد، والنصيحة عن الظلم، ونصر المظلومين، وإزالة الظلم عنهم، كما زارهم العلماء سابقًا من عهد الصحابة إلى يومنا هذا.

أما كون العلماء يتركونهم، ويهجرونهم، ولا يزورونهم؛ فهذا خطأ، هذا غلط، لا يقوله إلا الجهلة الذين لا يعرفون المصالح العامة

https://binbaz.org.sa/fatwas/1913/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AB-%D8%B4%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%A1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B0%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%88%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A1

Reconciling Hadiths on Self-Defense and Refraining from Fighting Rulers

The Mufti, Al-Allamah Salih Al-Fawzan, may Allah preserve him, was asked:

How do we reconcile the Hadith “Whoever is killed while protecting his property, then he is a martyr” (1) and the Hadith: “You should listen and obey the ruler (i.e. when he commands good) even if he flogs your back and takes your wealth, then still hear and obey (i.e. when he commands good).(2)

Answer: “You should listen and obey the ruler even if he flogs your back and takes your wealth”, this is with the Muslim Ruler.

As for protecting one’s wealth, this is (done) with other than the Muslim Ruler. If an oppressor, a thief, a robber, or a highway robber wants to take your wealth, then you defend (yourself) even if you are killed. If killed, you are a martyr.

As for the Muslim Ruler, you do not resist. Even if your wealth is taken, you do not resist; rather exercise patience due to the greater evil (i.e. the greater evil that may come about due to fighting).

So there is differentiation between the Muslim Ruler and someone among the people.

Question:What do you say to the one who says: “Indeed the hadith (i.e. the above hadith) nurtures the Muslim upon weakness”.

Answer: The Hadith nurtures the Muslim upon obedience and strength. This is because obedience to the Muslim Ruler is Strength and not weakness. He leaves this (i.e. this fighting) for the sake of a universal good and unity of the Muslims.

The people of desires want to do away with the authentic proofs so that they can safeguard their views. This is their intention. They bring doubts in the verses and the ahadith in order to safeguard their deviated views.

Source: Explanation of the hadith: “We were in a state of ignorance p.46-47. Questions and Answers section


1. Al-Bukhari 2480

2. Muslim 4554 and Ibn Abee Aasim in As-sunnah 2/492 no:1026

Between Vain Desire and Cautious Piety: The Character of Our Salaf with Rulers

خيانة السلطان
عن عبد الحميد بن عبد الله بن مسلم بن يسار قال: «لما حُبس ابن سيرين في السجن قال له السجان: إذا كان الليل فاذهب إلى أهلك فإذا أصبحت فتعال، فقال ابن سيرين: لا والله لا أعينك على خيانة السلطان» تاريخ بغداد للخطيب البغدادي (5/334).
شتان بين هذا المنهج المبارك القائم على الديانة والوفاء والورع وبين من لايبالي بشيء إلا ما أشرب من هواه.

ʿAbdul Ḥameed Bin Abdillah Ibn Muslim Ibn Yasaar, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

When Ibn Seereen, may Allah have mercy upon him, was imprisoned, the prison warden said to him: “When it is night time, go to your family, and return when morning arrives.’ So, Ibn Seereen said: “No, by Allah! I will not assist you in betraying (or being treacherous to) the ruler”.

Tareekh Baghdad by al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdaadi 5/334)

How great is the difference between this blessed methodology—founded upon devotion to religion, fulfilment of obligations, and cautious piety—as opposed to the one who cares about nothing except what he has immersed himself in of his (vain) desires.

https://al-badr.net/muqolat/4018

Paraphrased