Haddad slips a little bit of Jihad into Mayor election discussion

Posted on May 10, 2016

0


Here’s Part 1 of Islam21c’s BIG Discussion – London Mayor Election featuring Haitham al-Haddad, Azad Ali and Anas Altikriti:

 

I’ve only watched Part 1 (Part 2 is over an hour long). As usual, Haddad tells it as it is. He begins:

“We should look at ourselves, that we are a great Ummah, that Allah (jalla wa ‘ala) empowered us and that Allah (jalla wa ‘ala) entrusted us with a heavy responsibilty. All of us know the ayah that is frequently quoted when Allah (jalla wa ‘ala) says (Arabic). I think this ayah summarises a lot, ‘You are the best nation ever raised to mankind.” Not just because of your colour, or because of your ethnicity, because of your background, no, no, no. The reason was mentioned after that, you enjoin the good, forbid the evil and believe in Allah (jalla wa ‘ala). So we should look at ourselves, as individuals or as a community, as part of this great Ummah and we have a great responsibility towards that Ummah. We have a vision to look for, and that is to enjoin the good, forbid the evil and believe in Allah (jalla wa ‘ala). Now, Muslims should be smart enough to take any possible opportunity, any legal opportunity to further that cause which is enjoining the good, forbidding the evil and believing in Allah (jalla wa ‘ala).”

Not too shocking. He goes on:

“Now in certain circumstances maybe, we are not afraid to say that in certain circumstances jihad is the way.”

I’ve no idea why Haddad thought this was relevant to the discussion.

What does he mean when he says jihad is sometimes the way to further the ’cause’? Haddad’s understanding of jihad includes offensive, or what he describes as ‘pro-active’ or ‘initiative’ jihad. Here’s some of his views on the subject:

“…Muslims should prevent them [non-Muslims] from ruling any country with a law other than the shari’ah and Muslims should rule the entire planet with this Islamic law, and should this lead to fighting the People of the Book, Allah said: “And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (alone). The aim of Jihad is primarily for Allah’s law to govern the whole earth, and for no other law to remain.”

“The second type of jihad is wrongly translated, again as we said the wrong translation,  as ‘offensive’ Jihad. I don’t consider it as ‘offensive’ Jihad but we consider it as initiative, where the Muslim state, the Islamic Caliphate, has to take certain measures, fighting others after warning them, after, sorry, calling them to Islam, then, after warning them, then they have to initiate a fight with them in order to make sure that the law of Allah is superior to any other law.”

“Now the question is ‘So when do we establish jihad? When do we fight?’ This type of fighting which is called the ‘jihad al-talab’ which is wrongly translated as offensive jihad and it should be translated as pro-active jihad, this is better than offensive jihad. This pro-active jihad is carried out by the Islamic State, once there is the Islamic state, not an Islamic state, not any Islamic state…”

“So…establishing Islam by sword, this, I’m not denying it by the way, but I’m saying it is the last resort once all conditions are met, yeah?”

He continues with the discussion:

“But in many other circumstances there are different ways of furthering the Islamic cause. Those ways, as I say, Islam is a very flexible religion, so each context has its own ways of furthering the Islamic cause. This is one thing.

Talking about furthering the Islamic cause will be music to the ears of those who believe Sadiq Khan plans to implement the shariah a little bit at a time.

The cause is for the benefit of all:

“The other thing is we need to remember that once we talk about the Islamic cause, any Islamic cause helps others. It is not because of us. No, it is enjoining the good in order to let other people benefit from it. Forbidding the evil because the evil is affecting all of us. And as I always say, once I challenged a journalist. I said ‘Tell me about one thing that Islam calls for and is harmful for you.'”

I’d have liked to have been that journalist. I could have provided a few examples of where Haddad’s version of Islam would be harmful.

  1.  Being executed after leaving Islam.
  2.  Being a woman who gets ‘smacked’ by her husband.
  3.  Being stoned to death for having an extra-marital affair.

He goes on:

“We as Muslims should be engaged in changing the society, the environment we live in, the context we live in, to the betterment of all of us.”

Not many people will be on board with Haddad’s idea of a better society.

I don’t know how happy Haddad is with Khan’s victory considering he sees support for same-sex marriage as rejecting Islam:

“…rejecting Islam in this way, it means kufr. And they should see, and I advise them, or I advise them to go and to sit before a reputable body to judge whether they are still Muslims or not. This is a serious matter. And if they have left the fold of al-Islam then they need to repent to Allah (jalla wa ‘ala) and they need to enter al-Islam again. If they are insisting on whatever they have decided, and then a proper Islamic body should decide whether they are still Muslims or not. If they have rejected al-Islam it is up to them, yeah? Allah says (Arabic) ‘the hellfire is waiting for anyone who is rejecting Allah and his messenger.’ It’s up to them, we can’t do anything about it. Moreover, their families, it will be haram for them, if it has been established that they have left the fold of Islam and they can not be considered as Muslims, if their families…if their spouses are considering themselves as Muslims, then they should not continue having any kind of relationship with them because it is haram to have a relationship with a person who denounced his deen, his religion, denounced al-Islam.”

Time to watch Part 2.

Posted in: Uncategorized