Tuesday, September 19, 2017
Sunday, September 17, 2017
Question: There is a contract here to purchase a car where you pay in installments and then after say 3 years you have the option to purchase the car for a lump sum or give the car back. Is such a contract allowed? So you pay in installments but its not yours until you get to this last payment?
Firstly, if the agreement is such that you lease the car for a period of 3 years and during this you pay the monthly rent to the company and at the end of the 3 year period you have the option to return the car or purchase the car at a price.
Such a type of contract is allowed as this contract is essentially a rent contract followed by the option to purchase or return the car to the company. There is a single rent contract that exists in this case and once the period of rent ends then you have the option to either return the car or purchase i.e there is no contract upon the aspect or purchasing the car and therefore this is permissible.
The prophet (saw) said
إنّما البيع عن تراض
“Verily trade is only by mutual consent”
Secondly, If the agreement is such that you lease the car for a period of 3 years and during this you pay the monthly rent to the company and then at the end of the 3 years you become the owner of the car, this contract is a type of hire-purchase agreement. There are two contracts that are made in this type of agreement, one is the rent contract of the car and then the second contract where the ownership of the car is transferred from the owner to the renter at the end of the rental period.
The first problem with such a contract is that there are two contracts that are being conducted as a part of a single agreement.
نهى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عن صفقتين في صفقة
“The Prophet (saw) prohibited two contracts in one contract”
Secondly, a question arises, how can a rent agreement convert into a sale? To answer this many people tried to propose that there is no sale that takes place rather the car is gifted automatically at the end of the rent agreement period which is again unacceptable. Even though some scholars accepted that since it’s a gift - ‘hiba’ therefore it can be gifted even before the product actually is available, however this is a weak opinion and the stronger is the opinion of the Hanafis which is also mentioned in Almabsoot, Badai and Hashiyat ibn Abideen that it is not permitted to gift what does not exist or what is expected to be available in the future. And this is the reality of this contract. How can the car be gifted to the renter even before the rent agreement is completed i.e before the vehicle is made available? As long as the owner does not has the possession of the vehicle he cannot gift it.
Abi Saeed Al Khudri reported
نهى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عن شراء ما في بطون الانعام حتى تضع ، وعما في ضروعها الا بكيل او وزن وعن شراء العبد وهو آبق ، وعن شراء المغانم حتى تقسم وعن شراء الصدقات حتى تقبض وعن ضربة الغائص
“The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) forbade selling what is in the wombs of cattle until they give birth, and selling what is in their udders unless it is measured out, and selling a slave who has fled, and selling spoils of war until it has been distributed, and selling Sadaqah until it has been received, and what a diver is going to bring up."
[Reported by Ibn Majah, Tirmidhi, Ibn Shaybah, Ahmad, Dar Qutni, Bayhaqi, Ibn Hazm]
Ibn Abbas reported
عَنْ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ نَهَى عَنْ بَيْعِ الْمَضَامِينِ، وَالْمَلَاقِيحِ، وَحَبَلِ الْحَبَلَةِ
“The Prophet (saw) forbade the trade of Al-Madameen, Al-Malaqeeh and Habal al Habala.” Reported by Tabarani.
Al-madameen is the sale of what is in the wombs of female camels. Al- malaqeeh is the sale of the breeding qualities of camels" (i.e. for stud). Habal al Habala was a transaction in the days of ignorance where A man would buy the unborn offspring of the unborn offspring of a she-camel
Therefore the hiba part of the agreement is invalid and furthermore since there are two contracts in one contract, the original contract is invalid.
This is the reason that such a hire-purchase agreement is invalid and therefore not acceptable.
In short, it is compulsory for the contract to be crystal clear before it is signed, i.e whether it is a hiring contract or a sale contract and whether it is an immediate payment sale contract or deferred payment sale contract. This is while keeping in mind that the mixing of two contracts is not allowed as is the case today where hiring contracts convert into sale contracts if the buyer is interested in purchasing the product, this is because there are effectively two contracts in one contract in such a situation and hence the contract becomes invalid.
Hope it clarifies.
Ustadh Abu Khaled al-Hejazi
Saturday, September 16, 2017
The following are the notes from a brother's presentation on the topic, please excuse grammatical errors and inconsistencies in transliterations.
وَلْتَكُنْ مِنْكُمْ أُمَّةٌ يَدْعُونَ إِلَى الْخَيْرِ وَيَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِ وَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ
“Let there arise from amongst you a group(s) calling to the Khair (good) enjoining the Ma’ruf (good) and forbidding the evil, they are the ones who are successful.” [TMQ 3:104]
Allah (swt) obliged us to establish a political party who in the absence of the Islamic state works towards establishing al-khair, the whole of Islam through the re-establishment of the Islamic Khilafah. One that calls to establishing the greatest ma'ruf and forbidding the greatest munkar which is the absence of implementation of the law of Allah (swt) upon this earth.
In pursuit of this we as da'wah carriers work to win people to join our work or at least convince them to our thought. After convincing someone of the vital issue, the topic of the methodology to re-establish Khilafah is a key and one.
Among the various methods proposed we do come across people including many who are sincere who may hold the view that the method to re-establish the Islamic state is by physical fighting. Those who hold this position will usually quote a variety of evidences and arguments for their position. We should not shy away from these, rather we challenge them head on based upon the strength of the evidence for our method of intellectual and political struggle.
We should be strong in the understanding of the strongest methodology and the evidences that prove it. We should also be clear in articulating it to convince people from various backgrounds. We should be careful at being dismissive of people and assuming that we are not able to win them just because they are from a certain background or hold certain views. Indeed, over time the weakness of many proposed methodologies which are not founded on Islamic evidences not even upon a shubhat daleel (semblance of an evidence) such as that of Tadarruj (gradual implementation) have been exposed and with the increasing awareness of Islam in the Ummah people have moved towards looking at the Islamic evidences.
There various arguments that are put forward, the following are some of those that we have encountered.
1. What are the details of the Khilafah someone claim to work towards? What will be its systems and constitution?
Even before discussing methodology it is important to raise the questions to those who claim to work to re-establish Khilafah, what are the systems of this Khilafah? How will the economy run and the political system? Do they have a draft constitution based on evidences ready for implementation?
Sometimes we do not realise that to date we have not seen any other scholar, thinker or group that has prepared a constitution for the Khilafah ready for implementation that is based upon the detailed Islamic evidences other than the constitution initially prepared by Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani elaborated in the book ‘Muqadimat Dastoor’ (The Draft Constitution and the Necessary Evidences for it), originally published in 1963 and subsequently amended by other scholars. How can you be working for something if it's not clear what you are trying to establish?
2. The claim that the revelation of the verses of Jihad in Madinah abrogates the entire Makkan stage.
So regardless of what you put forward in terms of evidences from the Seerah in Makkah, they say the ayat of the sword in Madina abrogate these.
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled." [Tawba:29]
What we find is that they are often overconfident in their positions as have been used to discuss with the likes of Ikhwan al-Muslimeen and have seldom been challenges from an usuli perspective.
Abrogation (naskh) happens specifically, it is incorrect to say that the ayat revealed about Jihad abrogates everything in the Makkan stage.
Linguistically abrogation means cancelling (Izaalah) or changing the thing and transforming it from one state to another while it still exists in essence. Technically, it is the address (Khitaab) of the legislator which prevents the continuation of a Hukm Shar’i of a previous address (Khitaab).
As for the term abrogator (Naasikh) it may refer to Allah (swt):
“Whatever a Verse (revelation) do We abrogate.” (TMQ Al-Baqarah: 106)
Or it may refer to an Ayah: Thus, we say the ‘Ayah of the sword’ (At-Tawbah: 29) abrogated so and so Ayah.
As for the abrogated (Mansookh) it is the Hukm which has been lifted, like the Hukm which obliges paying the Sadaqah in front of the Messenger (saw) in the confidence of the Messenger (saw), the Hukm of bequests for heirs, the Hukm of waiting for complete year in respect to the widow. In abrogation the Hukm abrogated must be Shar’i and the evidence which indicates the lifting of the Hukm must be Shar’i and come after the address whose Hukm has been abrogated.
Allah (swt) has informed us of the occurrence of abrogation and the Ahkam which have been abrogated show us its true occurrence.
مَا نَنْسَخْ مِنْ آَيَةٍ أَوْ نُنْسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا أَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ
“Whatever a Verse (revelation) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is able to do all things?” (TMQ Al-Baqarah: 106)
وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَا آَيَةً مَكَانَ آَيَةٍ وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يُنَزِّلُ قَالُوا إِنَّمَا أَنْتَ مُفْتَرٍ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ
“And when We change a Verse in place of another, and Allah knows the best of what He sends down, they (the disbelievers) say: you (O Muhammad [saw]) are but a liar. Nay but most of them know not.” (TMQ An-Nahl: 101)
The texts from which we extract our method are not abrogated. For example:
فَاصْدَعْ بِمَا تُؤْمَرُ وَأَعْرِضْ عَنِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ
“So proclaim what you have been commanded and turn away from the Mushrikeen (Polythiests).” [TMQ Hijr: 94]
The various evidences we quote to prove our method such as the repeated actions of the culturing of the sahaba of the Prophet (saw) in Makkah or the actions of intellectual and political struggle against the false aqaid, systems and rulers of the Quraysh even in the face of hardship and the persecution of the Sahabah or the various evidences when the Prophet (saw) sought the nussrah from the people of power - are not abrogated just because the ayat that permitted fighting and Jihad were revealed in Madina.
Remember the topic of abrogation has been debated by the scholars for centuries and they have elaborated their views on the rules that have been abrogated and do not mention these.
مَنْ يُطِعِ الرَّسُولَ فَقَدْ أَطَاعَ اللَّهَ
“He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah.” (TMQ An-Nisa: 80)
Therefore, we are obliged to make Ta'asi and emulate the Prophet (saw) in his method whether that is the actions of concentrated and collective culturing he did, the actions of intellectual and political struggle or seeking the nussrah which have been proven by authentic texts and which have qara'in (legal indications) indicating their obligation. We are obliged with these ahkam of the method and cannot abandon them.
Abrogation is not relevant when it comes to these evidences. Rather what can be said is that the verses of Jihad abrogated non-violence even when attacked, so of course we say if Muslims are attacked today by Kuffar like what happened in Iraq and other lands then defensive Jihad becomes obligatory. This is not related to the subject of working to establish Khilafah, rather it relates to repelling the enemy.
3. Refuting the claim that every Muslim man in the world today has to partake physically in Jihad.
They mix the mas’ala (issue) of re-establishing the Khilafah and the mas’ala of Jihad fi-sabeelillah. They are two different matters and not the same subject. It's like mixing the issue of Salah and Zakat.
Jihad has a shariah meaning, there are many ayat of Quran related to it.
وَقَاتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّى لَا تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ وَيَكُونَ الدِّينُ كُلُّهُ لِلَّهِ
“And fight them until there is no more Fitnah, and the religion will be all for Allah alone.” [TMQ 8:39]
In Badi’ul Sanai’ of the Hanafi Mazhab, it states the following: “Jihad in the language is exerting effort. In the understanding of the Shara, it is exerting effort and energy in fighting fi sabeel lillah by body, finance, tongue or another.”
In Manhul Jaleel of the Maliki Mazhab, al-Jihad is defined as the, “fighting by a Muslim against a kaafir (who does not have a treaty with the Muslims) to make the word of Allah the highest…. or for a Muslim to arrive to do Jihad or to enter the Kaafir’s land for fighting.” Ibn Arafa defined this.
Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani says in The Islamic Personality Volume 2, “Jihad is fard Kifayah to initiate (the fighting) and Fard Ayni when the enemy attacks, upon the ones who are being attacked (ala man haajimuhum) and fard kifayah upon the rest (of the Ummah). This fard is not silenced until the enemy has been repelled and the Islamic land has been purified from its impurity”.
If an Islamic country was exposed to attack from the enemy, then the fight against the enemy becomes fard ‘ain (personal obligation) upon the people of that land (country). If the repelling of the enemy could not happen with the inhabitants of this land, than it becomes fard ‘ain upon the Muslims who are the nearest (geographically) to this land, then those who follow them (geographically) and so on until the repelling of the enemy is achieved, even if this obligation included all of the Muslims.
If the enemy occupied the country and dominated over the Muslims within it and imposed its authority upon them and they became unable to fight against it, to remove the authority from them, then they are treated as if the are captives (prisoners of war). The fard ‘ain, in this case, would be upon the Muslims who came next to them (geographically) and so on, until the occupation is removed and the country returns to Bilad al Islam (the land of Islam).
To say that Jihad becomes fard ‘ain on Muslims means that it is upon those who are capable amongst them, i.e. the armies and those who are like them (i.e. have military power). This is because the ‘capability’ (Istita’ah) is (indirectly) understood in every hukm shar’i. Therefore, it is incorrect to change the definition and thus say that Jihad is fard ‘ain upon the armies instead of upon the Muslims, this is because the mentioning of ‘Muslims’ is more general, and it is clear in it that it is a duty (fard) upon those who are qualified and have the capability and ability to fighting in the manner which the shara’ has explained.
On the authority of Abu Huraira Abdul Rahman ibn Sakhr (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) saying, "What I have forbidden you, stay away from. What I have ordered you [to do], do as much of it as you can. Verily, the people before you were destroyed only because of their excessive questioning and their disagreeing with their Prophets." Recorded by al-Bukhari and Muslim.
The Prophet (saw) said: "Pray standing. If you are not able to, then pray sitting. And if you are not able to [do even that], then pray while on [your] side." (Recorded by al-Bukhari.)
This can be seen in history when Palestine was occupied by the Crusaders for 100 years, the scholars said Jihad against them was Fard Ain, however did they all practically oblige everyone to move there and go to fight? In fact if this was the case all the scholars themselves would have moved there and fought against the crusaders which clearly didn’t happen. Therefore it is clear that they understood the hukm in the same way and this is the classical position.
4. The claim that Jihad continues with or without a Khalifah - therefore we are obliged to individually undertake it.
They also argue that Jihad continues whether there is a Khalifah or not so that means we must individually undertake it.
Imam Ahmad and Abu Dawud narrated from Anas who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “…Jihad (madhi) from when Allah sent me until the last of my Ummah fights the Dajjal. It will not be invalidated by the tyranny of the tyrant or the justice of the just (leader).”
We agree that the obligation of Jihad is upon the Ummah like all the other obligations like ruling by the book of Allah, implementing the hudud etc. Again the issue depends upon capability, the direct obligation is upon the people of power.
Today, we as an Ummah are sinful unless we work to achieve these which will in reality occur when the Khilafah establishes them.
5. The claim that the hadith of raising the sword applies today due to kufr buwah (open kufr) of the rulers.
Al-Bukhari narrated on the authority of Junada b. abi Umayyah who said: We went to ‘Ubadah b. as-Samit when he was sick and we said: May Allah (swt) guide you. Inform us of a Hadith from the Messenger of Allah (saw) so Allah may benefit you from it. He said, the Messenger of Allah (saw) called upon us and we gave him the Bai’ah, and he said, of that which he had taken from us, that we should give him the pledge to listen and obey, in what we like and dislike, in our hardship and ease, and that we should not dispute the authority of its people unless we saw open Kufr (kufr buwah) upon which we had a proof (burhan) from Allah.
The hadith was reported by At-Tabarani as “kufran Surahan (open kufr)”, and as “unless the disobedience of Allah is bawahan”.
'Awf Ibnu Malik Al-Ashja'i said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah (SAW) say: 'The best of your Imams are those whom you love and they love you and whom you pray for and they pray for you, and the worst of your Imams are those whom you hate and they hate you and you curse them and they curse you.' We asked: 'O Messenger of Allah, shall we not then declare war on them?' He said: 'No, as long as they establish the prayer among you', [Muslim]
Ibn Hajar said in his Fateh al-Bari said: “The Fuqahaa’ agreed unanimously on the obligation of obedience to the overpowering (mutaghallib) ruler and of fighting (together) with him; and that obedience to him is better than rebel against him, because this spares the blood and appeases the masses. However, if the ruler showed explicit kufr (kufr sareeh), then it is not obliged to obey him; it is rather obligatory, for those who can, to fight against him, as it came in the hadith.”
This view is also mentioned in Nayl al-Awtar and supported by Imam Shawkani. That is, if the ruler rules by other than the Shari’ah he is fought until he either repents or is removed. However that is the only situation that it applies to i.e. the ruling of a Khaleefah who resorts to the Kufr ruling and disobedience to Allah. It does not relate to the Khaleefah becoming tyrannical and also does not relate to his personality becoming corrupt. In which case obedience to him is binding and the Muslims should still pray behind him and fight Jihad behind him.
However, these Ahadith are not connected to the current situation. They are all connected to revolt and rising against the Khaleefah and are titled under the subject of ‘Khurooj min al Khaleefah’ i.e. rising against the authority of a Khaleefah or an Imam.
The current situation is not that of the Khulafaa who used to rule by Islam and then turned away from Islam. The current problem is also not merely related to removing a ruler by killing him. Rather, entire systems of Kufr have been implemented over Muslims for decades, none of the rulers have ever ruled by the Shari’ah and none of them are Khulafaa within a Khilafah. The systems that they are applying are either monarchies or Capitalistic with some sort of democratic framework. Hence, the reality isn’t that of removing a bad Khaleefah within an Islamic State. The reality is of uprooting an entire Kufr system, including its ruler, to again establish Dar ul-Islam. The current rulers are not comparable in any way to Khulafaa who have introduced one Kufr law into the Khilafah. Hence these Ahadith, which have always been understood in the context of Dar ul-Islam i.e. where Islam is implemented and the Muslims possess the security, do not apply upon the current situation. The reality which they address is that of removing a Khaleefah who rules with Kufr within the Islamic State, not that of uprooting an entire Kufr system merely by fighting and killing the ruler of that system.
6. Refuting the claim that the method of Ibn Taymiyyah and other scholars was fighting to re-establish the Khilafah when there was no Khalifah for a considerable period of time after the occupation of Iraq and the capital of the Islamic state.
The Mongols invaded Baghdad and killed the Khalifah in 656 AH.
The fatwa of Ibn Taymiyyah is correct in terms of its subject, which was to fight the Tatars who attacked the Muslims since jihad in this situation was an individual obligation (fard ‘ain). It was obligatory on the Islamic Ummah to fight the kuffar to eliminate and expel them from the lands of the Muslims. Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) was from the distinguished ‘Ulema who encouraged the Muslims to fight. He was at the forefront of the Ulema and the Muslims. He held position that was grave and well known regarding the fighting of the Tatars.
Jihad continues under the leadership of any Ameer whether he is pious or not as mentioned in the noble hadeeth. Thus Jihad is undertaken under the leadership of any Muslim ruler whether he is Khaleefah or not as long as the fighting is against the kuffar. So any Muslim ruler who mobilizes the army to fight the kuffar such fighting is correct. It is well known that the Islamic lands had Walis (governors) and the Wali (governor) is a ruler. When the Khaleefah was killed the Walis were present. And with their armies they opposed the Tatars. This took place in the Wilayah of Sham during the time of Ibn Taymiyyah. It also took place in the Wilayah of Egypt during the time of ‘Izz b. Abd as-Salam when the Tatar were defeated at the battle of ‘Ayn Jalut. So the Muslims were fighting and the armies were fighting. And there were walis present in the respective wilayaahs.
This is in regard to Jihad generally and mobilization of the armies to fight whether there is a Khaleefah or not. As for when the lands of the Muslims are attacked by the kuffar, it is incumbent on every person who is able to bear weapons to fight the aggressor and repel his aggression. This does not require the permission of the ruler to fight, even the woman can go out to fight without the permission of her husband and the servant can go out without the permission of his master.
When the Khaleefah was killed Muslims still had governors. The Muslims together with their governors were looking to find who had survived from Banu al-‘Abbas so that they can give bay’ah to one of them. In the same year in which the Khaleefah was killed, some of Banu Al-Abbas were able arrive at Egypt which was the strongest wilayah in the Muslim lands at that time. One of them took an army and returned wishing to restore the Khilafah to Baghdad, but he was not able to do so. Many were killed and the leader of the army did not return to Egypt.
The Muslims continued to search for someone from Banu al-Abbas for whom they can give the pledge of the Khilafah. The situation continued until Rajab 659 AH (3 years after killing of the Khalfah) when one person from Banu al-‘Abbas from the relatives of Khaleefah al-Mu’tasim billah whom the Tartars killed, reached Cairo, where a council of governors (walis) was held in the presence of the Ulema, and after they had checked his lineage and ability they gave him the Bay’ah of Khilafah. The Khilafah remained in Cairo since that time for 300 years until it transferred to the Ottoman Sultan Saleem and the seat of the Khilafah moved to Istanbul.
Thus, the Muslims did not fight the Tatar in the time of Ibn Taymiyyah to re-establish the Khilafah. They fought the Tatars who were advancing on the Muslim lands. This is clear. The Khialafah was not established in Al-Sham but in Cairo. Also, the reality of the interruption to the Khilafah those days is not the same as today. The Muslims in those days had governors ruling them by Islam. So the land was dar al-Islam. They used to give obedience to Banu al-‘Abbas and they were looking for someone who had survived from them in order to appoint him as Khaleefah, and this is what happened on Rajab 659 AH. They used to consider the Khilafah as continuing among the Abbasids.
As for today, the land is one of dar al-Kufr. The Khilafah has been destroyed and it ceases to exist. The reality of its reestablishment is like the reality of establishing the state in Madinah al-Munawwarah. The method should be the same method through which the Messenger (saw) established the state in Madinah via the people by seeking the Nusrah (help) from the strongest faction from the Ummah.
7. The claim that the Ta'ifa al-mansoora (victorious group) or Ta'ifa az-zahira mentioned in hadith mentions those who fight and therefore that must be the method.
There are many ahadith that talk about the Triumphant or victorious group or party.
Bukhari narrated from Al-Mogheerah ibn Sho’ba that RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said “There will always be a group amongst my Ummah that will be triumphant and Allah will cause them to triumph.”
Muslim related from Thawbaan that RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said,
“There will always be a group amongst my Ummah who is triumphant upon truth, abandoning them will not harm them, until the order of Allah is given and they will be like that (triumphant)”
Muslim related from Jabir ibn Abdullah that RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "There will always be a group, triumphant in fighting for Al-Haq until Day of Resurrection. Then will Isa ibn Maryam (as) will descend and he will be asked by their Ameer to lead the prayer, but he will reply, No, your ameer has to be from you and this is the Karamah of Allah.”
Muslim related from Uqba bin Amir that RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said
"There will always be a group in my Ummah that will fight according to the order of Allah, victorious over their enemies and there will be no harm on them from there contradictors until the hour comes and they will be triumphant."
Muslim related from Mu'awiyah that RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "There will always be a group from my Ummah that will be steadfast on the order of Allah, they will not be harmed by those who oppose them or abandon them, until the order of Allah comes and they will be triumphant over humankind."
Tirmidhi related from Thawban that RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "There will always be a group from my Ummah that will be triumphant upon Haq, they will not be harmed by those who abandoned them until the order of Allah."
Abu Daud related from Imran ibn Hasseen that RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "There will always be a group from my Ummah that will fight on the truth, triumphant against those who oppose them and the last of them will fight the Dajjal."
Ahmad related from Jabir bin Abdullah that RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "There will always be a group from my Ummah that will fight upon truth until the Day of Judgment."
Ahmad related that RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "There will always be a group from my Ummah triumphant upon the truth, victorious over their enemies, there will be no harm from those who oppose them and they will not be harmed until the order of Allah comes and they will be like that (triumphant). They said, "O RasulAllah, where are they? He said, "In Baytul-Maqdis and the precincts of Baytul-Maqdis."
At-Tabaraani in "Al-Kabeer" related that RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, “There will always be a group from my Ummah triumphant on the truth and victorious over those who oppose them and no harm will come to them from those who contradict them, until the order of Allah comes and they are so. RasulAllah was asked, "Where are they?" He replied, "Baytul-Maqdis."
It was mentioned in hadith of Abu Umaama from Ahmad that it is Baytul-Maqdis, and from Tabaraani in a similar hadith, and in the hadith of Abu Hurayrah in the Al-Awsat by At-Tabaraani, RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "They will fight in Damascus and its precincts, and at the gates of Baytul-Maqdis and its precincts, they will not be harmed by those who abandon them and they will be triumphant until the Day of Judgment." (Fath-Bari)
Reflection upon the hadith clarifies the following about the ahadeeth,
1 – It refers to a part of the Ummah and not all of it, for the reason that Taa'ifa (Group) in the language means the part of a thing and every part of something is the Taa'ifa of it. Qamoos says, "And a Taa'fa of a thing is a part of it."
2 – It will be steadfast on the truth, which is Islam, " قائمة بأمر الله", "steadfast on the order of Allah."
3 – They will be fighting on the truth, in the way of Allah, (yuqaatiloon alal haqq) they will fight on truth, they will fight according to the order of Allah.
4 - It is the same strength and ability will lead to fighting the enemy army, vanquishing them, defeating them decisively and establishing an apparent victory,
"Fighting on the Truth against those who oppose them."
"Fighting on the order of Allah, vanquishing the enemy."
5 – Indeed this group, “fighting at the gates of Damascus and its precincts and at the gates of Bayt ul-Maqdis and its precincts” means fighting the enemy and emerging victorious in the areas of ash-Sham and its precincts.
These descriptions indicate that this group is based on Islam, fights in its cause, and has strength that makes it possible to defeat the enemy decisively and clearly obvious. Regarding the enemies of the states and the armies, the group that is triumphant over them must be a strong Muslim army in a Muslim country, led by the Khaleefah or the army commander, fighting the enemy and beating them in a humiliating defeat, victorious over them, vanquishing them and dominating them. And it will be launched from Ash-Sham and its precincts, the state and army has been battling the enemy and will defeat it and dominate it. Namely, this group is either the entourage of the state and the army which will be victorious over the enemy, vanquish them and dominate them, or this group is working for a state and army that will triumph over the enemy, vanquish them and dominate over them.
This could apply to the era of Prophet Muhammad, صلى الله عليه وسلم and the companions in the fight against the enemy and dominating over them. It can also apply to the golden era of Islam in the fight against the enemy dominating over them, to every Khaleefah and the leader of the Islamic army in the state, fighting the enemy, defeating, vanquishing and dominating him.
It can also apply to Salahuddin and his army in the defeat of the Crusaders, as well as the Qutuz and Baibars and his army's victory over the Tartars. It could also apply to us because we work to create a strong Islamic state – a rightly guided Khilafah – to fight the kafir enemy, defeat them, dominate them and emerge obviously victorious. So, eradicating the state of Jews and opening Rome as promised. This is what could be and is probable.
But this does not apply to any group which is neither an Islamic state nor an army of the Islamic state, because without a state or an army, it could not vanquish the enemy nor dominate it obviously. Nor can it, without a state or army of the Islamic state, eliminate the entity of the Jews or defeat America or Britain.
Thus, it does not apply to groups, without a state or army in a state, fighting the enemy, because the description of the triumphant group is not just fighting but vanquishing the enemy, and the enemy state and army cannot be defeated, vanquished of dominated by a group without a state or army. It also does not apply to any group that is not working to establish an Islamic state - the Khilafah- because it cannot vanquish states and armies. Fighting and dominance over the enemy, whether it already exists practically or is being worked to establish, is the fundamental description of this group.
As for the phrase "there will always be" does not mean they it will not be interrupted, but it means that it will prevail over the enemy in successive periods until the Day of Resurrection, namely, that its victory over the enemy is not once and then the enemy returns to defeat us forever, rather our victory will be in successive periods until the Day of Resurrection. This is what has happened when we were triumphant over the kuffar and we were victorious over them in the days of Islam then we defeated and won and these were the days that we were given by turns (by Allah) and then came the Crusaders and they were defeated, and then came the Tartars and they were defeated, and then we were weak and then we returned and we opened Constantinople and it became Istanbul ... and it is upon the Khilafah that when it returns, by the permission of Allah, it will eradicate the entity of Jews, which occupied Palestine, and it will open Rome, by the permission of Allah, and this described group will remain upon the Truth until the last of them fights the Dajjal. It is noteworthy that in the hadeeth of the descent of Esa (as) before the Day of Resurrection, he will find a state and an Ameer, and then there will be victory over the enemy, decisively and obviously.
So, the "there will always be" does not mean without interruption, but it means that the world will not be without periods of victory by the Muslims against the enemy, resoundingly and obviously, until the Day of Resurrection.
This is like saying of RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم, narrated by al-Bukhaari:
"The affair of this Ummah will be until the Last Hour"
This does not mean that the integrity of the nation will remain always, as in various periods it was interrupted, as in after the destruction of the Khilafah.
It means that this world would never be without the integrity of this Ummah until the Day of Resurrection, it will not become "crooked" and never return to integrity, and when her Khilafah departed her matter did not return but left as well, and every time "crookedness" returns, the integrity of the Ummah will return until the Day of Resurrection.
Such is the matter of the Hadeeth about the Triumphant Group, so when RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم informs us about its description and announced its Fadl, and that it will fight the enemies and be victorious over them, vanquish them and be triumphant over them decisively and obviously, and this will not occur except with an Islamic State and a Muslim army which will defeat the Kafir states and their armies, so we must persist in assistance and increase our effort and struggle on the path to establish the Islamic state, the rightly guided Khilafah, so we will be in its army and fight the enemy, so we vanquish them, we be victorious over them and we are triumphant over them decisively and obviously. So, we hope from Allah (swt) that we are from that group which RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم mentioned in his noble Ahadeeth.
Then there is of the matter of utmost importance and that is the that the issue is not that we say this group is the Triumphant Group or we say this one or that, indeed the issue is that whoever loves to be in the Triumphant Group he work to achieve what was conveyed of its description and so he works to establish an Islamic state and an Islamic army that fights the Kafir enemies America, Britain and Jews ... etc and vanquishes them, is victorious over them and dominates them. And this is what indicates to him that he is part of the Triumphant Group, so one who intends to be of the Triumphant Group, let him work with whatever he has, by the permission of Allah, to achieve its description of overwhelming the enemies, achieving victory and dominance over them,
We ask Allah (swt) that we are of the Triumphant Group and that we witness the Islamic state, the rightly guided Khilafah, and we are from soldiers of Islam who defeat the enemy, overwhelm them and are victorious and triumphant over them.