Skip to main content

How Will the Islamic Ummah Revive Today?

The following is the translation of an Arabic leaflet issued at the time of Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani.


Revival is the intellectual elevation. While the economical elevation is not a revival. An evidence of that is Kuwait which is economically much more elevated than some of the European states like Sweden, Holland and Belgium: Yet Sweden, Holland and Belgium are elevated and Kuwait is not. The ethical elevation is not a revival as well. An evidence of that is that Madina today is superior to any country in the world ethically (morally), yet it is not elevated. Thus revival is the intellectual elevation.

But this revival could be true (proper) revival or untrue. So America, Europe and Russia are revived countries, but their revival is incorrect. Because it is not established on a spiritual foundation, since the true revival is the intellectual revival which is established on the spiritual foundation. If the intellectual elevation is not based on the spiritual foundation then it is not a revival but an incorrect one. Thus there is not any true revival except that based on the foundation of the Islamic thought, i.e. except the Islamic revival, because it is alone the intellectual elevation based on the spiritual foundation.

The way to initiate this revival is to establish the ruling (government) upon a thought, not upon systems and laws and legislation. Establishing the state upon canons and laws will not create a revival, on the contrary it will be deluded and a distraction from the revival. Revival will not occur unless the ruling and authority is established upon a thought, then the daily solutions (treatments) of life's problems emanate from this thought; that is the systems and legislation and laws emanate from it. So when Europe revived this was upon a thought which was the detachment of the religion from the State, adding the liberties (freedoms) as well. The revival of Russia was based on a thought, which was materialism and the materialistic evolution, that is the transference of things (naturally) from one situation to a better situation. So Russia established the ruling (government) on this thought in 1917 and thus revived. When Arabs revived they also revived on the Islamic thought which the Prophet (SAW) brought as a message from Allah (SWT), and established the ruling and authority (sultan) upon it. So the revival occurred to the Arabs when they embraced it and established the ruling (government) upon it. All this is (decisive) evidence that the way for initiating the revival is establishing the ruling upon a thought.

The evidence that establishing the ruling on systems and legislation does not initiate revival is what Mustafa Kamal made in Turkey where he established the ruling (government) on systems and canons to create a revival. So he adopted the Western systems and laws and started to implement them, and implemented them actually by force, but he did not create a revival, and accordingly Turkey did not revive; rather it declined from the level which it held before. Look at Turkey nowadays, it is one of the most declined countries. While Lenin who came in the same period in which Mustafa Kamal came managed to elevate Russia effectively, and look at it today as one of the strongest states (N.B. before its recent collapse). The reason for that is that Lenin established the ruling on a thought which is the communist thought. From this thought the solutions of the daily issues emanated, i.e. the systems and the canons. That is to say, he started to treat the problems by laws adopted from the thought, upon which he established the ruling. Therefore Lenin established the ruling in Russia in 1917 upon a thought thus he revived Russia. And Mustafa Kamal established the ruling in 1924 upon systems and legislation to revive Turkey but he failed, rather it declined. Establishing the government upon the systems and legislation was the reason that prevented Turkey from revival because it was deluded with it.

The most recent example of this is what: Jamal Abdul Nasser has done in Egypt. Since 1952 he established the government on systems and legislation. At the beginning he established it upon hanging the ruling system by replacing the monarchical system with the republican system and upon distributing the farming lands. Then he moved further to adopt social systems of what is called the state socialism, but he did not initiate a revival. On the contrary, Egypt nowadays from intellectual, economic and political aspects is more declined than it was before 1952, i.e. before the military coup. When comparing its members of parliament today, i.e. the National Council, with its parliamentary members before 1952 from the angle of their intellectual and political capability, the intellectual and political difference appears quite clear. The situation in Egypt prevents the revival, because establishing the ruling upon the systems and legislation does not initiate revival. What creates the revival is only establishing the ruling upon a thought.

However, establishing the government upon a thought does not mean to make a military coup and seize the power and establish the government upon the thought, since this will not found a revival, and moreover is unlikely to settle in power. Rather it means to explain to the Ummah or the stronger group of the Ummah the thought upon which it is intended to revive the Ummah, and direct itself in the battle of life on the basis of this thought; then the government is established upon this thought by the Ummah and thus the revival occurs surely. So the essence of the revival is not seizing the power, rather it is unifying the Ummah on the thought and making it direct its life on this thought. Then the power is taken and the government is established upon that thought. Seizing the power is not an aim in itself, and it is incorrect to be an aim. Rather, it is a method for the revival by establishing the government upon the thought. Therefore the ruling is taken to establish it upon the thought, in order that the revival ours. The proper example for that is that which the Prophet (SAW) did. When he was sent by Allah the Supreme with the Message of Islam, he invited the people to the Islamic creed, i.e. to the thought. And when he gathered the people of the Madina, Al Aws and Al Khazraj, on the Islamic creed, i.e. on the thought, and made them direct their life according to it, he took the ruling (power or authority) in the Madina and established upon the Islamic creed and started to say: "I was ordered to fight against the people until they say: La ilaha illa Allah, Muhammadur Rasool Allah. If they said it, they protected of me their blood and property except for the right upon their property." Thus he started to call for the thought, and accordingly the revival occurred in Madina, then in the Arabs, then in every people who entered Islam, i.e. embraced the thought and had the authority which takes care of its affairs established upon it.

Today, the Islamic Ummah in all its countries is undoubtedly declined, and it was trying to revive for more than two hundred years, and it failed to revive until now. The reason is because their governments are built on systems and legislation. And the ruling whether established on non-Islamic systems, i.e. kufr systems as it is the case in most of the Islamic countries, or established on Islamic systems and divine rules as was the case in some few countries as Yemen before the revolution of As-Sallal, they are all declined, and have no revival. The reason of this is that the ruling is established on systems not on a thought. Even establishing the ruling upon Islamic systems and divine rules does not create a revival. That which initiates the revival is establishing the ruling upon the Islamic thought, i.e. upon the Islamic creed. So establishing the State upon "La ilaha illa Allah, Muhammadur Rasool Allah" is that which creates the revival. But establishing it upon the Mazhab of Abu Hanifa or upon the book of Tahtaoui or upon the divine rules does not create a revival. Instead, it must be established upon "La ilaha illa Allah, Muhammadur Rasool Allah", then after that the divine rules are adopted in their capacity as commands from Allah, and they are implemented as His orders and prohibitions, not because they are good and beneficial or because they contain a benefit or the like. Rather because they are revealed from Allah, that is derived from "La ilaha illa Allah, Muhammadur Rasool Allah", and by such the revival occurs.

So in order to revive the Islamic Ummah today, she must make the Islamic creed the basis which directs its life, and establish the ruling and authority upon it, and treat the daily affairs by the rules which emanate from this creed, i.e. by the divine rules in their capacity as prescriptions from Allah only not due to any other description. Thus the revival definitely occurs, rather the correct revival not any revival. Thus the Islamic Ummah returns back to hold the seat of the highest glory and to take the initiative to the world again.
This is the way to revive the Islamic Ummah truly, and along this path Muslims have to proceed.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An advice to Muslims working in the financial sector

Assalam wa alaikum wa rahmatullah wabarakatahu, Dear Brothers & Sisters, We are saddened to see Muslims today even those who practise many of the rules of Islam are working in jobs which involve haram in the financial sector. They are working in positions which involve usurious (Riba) transactions, insurance, the stock market and the like. Even though many of the clear evidences regarding the severity of the sin of Riba are known, some have justified their job to themselves thinking that they are safe as long as they are not engaged in the actual action of taking or giving Riba. Brothers & Sisters, You should know that the majority of jobs in the financial sector, even the IT jobs in this area are haram (prohibited) as they involve the processing of prohibited contracts. If you work in this sector, do not justify your job to yourself because of the fear of losing your position or having to change your career, fear Allah as he should be feared and consider His law regard

Q&A: Age of separating children in the beds?

Question: Please explain the hukm regarding separation of children in their beds. At what age is separation an obligation upon the parents? Also can a parent sleep in the same bed as their child? Answer: 1- With regards to separating children in their beds, it is clear that the separation which is obligatory is when they reach the age of 7 and not since their birth. This is due to the hadith reported by Daarqutni and al-Hakim from the Messenger (saw) who said: When your children reach the age of 7 then separate their beds and when they reach 10 beat them if they do not pray their salah.’ This is also due to what has been narrated by al-Bazzar on the authority of Abi Rafi’ with the following wording: ‘We found in a sheet near the Messenger of Allah (saw) when he died on which the following was written: Separate the beds of the slave boys and girls and brothers and sisters of 7 years of age.’ The two hadiths are texts on the separation of children when they reach the age of 7. As for the

Q&A: Shari' rule on songs, music, singing & instruments?

The following is a draft translation from the book مسائل فقهية مختارة (Selected fiqhi [jurprudential] issues) by the Mujtahid, Sheikh Abu Iyas Mahmoud Abdul Latif al-Uweida (May Allah protect him) . Please refer to the original Arabic for exact meanings. Question: What is the Shari’ ruling in singing or listening to songs?  What is the hukm of using musical instruments and is its trade allowed? I request you to answer in detail with the evidences? Answer: The Imams ( Mujtahids ) and the jurists have differed on the issue of singing and they have varying opinions such as haraam (prohibited), Makruh (disliked) and Mubah (permissible), the ones who have prohibited it are from the ones who hold the opinion of prohibition of singing as a trade or profession, and a similar opinion has been transmitted from Imam Shafi’i, and from the ones who disliked it is Ahmad Ibn Hanbal who disliked the issue and categorised its performance under disliked acts, a similar opinion has been tran