Al-Hakim narrates with an authentic chain that Rasulullah was traveling with his companions when a bird came flapping it’s wings over his head. The Messenger of Allah said: ‘Who has brought grief to this bird?” One of the companions said: “I have taken some of its young ones.” Rasulullah ordered him to return them to their mother.
Rasulullah was leading an army on a travel for Jihad, the peak of Islam, but he was still teaching the sahabah about an issue as simple as mercy towards a bird.
There are some brothers and sisters who expressed concern when I talked about the opinions of scholars regarding cheese at a time when we have more important issues at hand that are of great concern to the ummah. I would like to take this opportunity to point out an important principle in Islam and that is: Islam is a comprehensive religion that covers all aspects of our life and every Islamic teaching is important. Rasulullah has taught us minute aspects of life that would otherwise seem trivial such as how to eat, growing a beard, and even manners of responding to the call of nature. If these were trivial issues Rasulullah would not have wasted his time teaching us about them, the Sahabah would not have narrated them and our scholars would not have documented them in their books of hadith and fiqh. The topic of cheese is even more important because it relates to what enters our body. It is enough to state that our dua would not be accepted if our food is haraam. So the rulings of diet are very important .
Some of these people who do not recognize the importance of the smaller issues told Salman al Farisi: “We see that your Prophet has taught you everything even about excrements” Salman said: “Yes he did. He taught us not to face qibla when urinating or defecating, not to use our right hands in washing ourselves, not to use less than three stones and not to use dung or bones” (narrated by Muslim and others.) The Messenger of Allah who taught us this was also a head of state and a leader of Jihad.
When one understands the wisdom behind the comprehensiveness of the teachings of Islam nothing is trivial anymore. When we understand that every moment in our lives, every movement, and every act should be for the sake of Allah we appreciate the reason why Rasulullah taught us about everything.
The problem is not in talking about the sunnah in matters that one may assume to be trivial but the problem is when one talks about the beard to the exclusion of Tawhid, wearing the clothes above the ankle to the exclusion of Jihad, or the miswak to the exclusion of wala and bara.
On the other hand, it is even a more serious problem when people occupy themselves with the mustahab ( the recommended) and ignore the major issues, some of which are issues of aqeedah. There are some that escape from the responsibilities that demand sacrifice to the safety of the easy rituals. We need to take Islam as a whole. We should follow Quran and the way of Rasulullah in all matters.

Cheese is great. So if you are a fan of cheese you might be asking yourself the question, is cheese made by non-Muslims allowed or not?

Well if it is cheese made from vegetarian rennet then there is no concern but the issue is with cheese made from natural rennet. Rennet is extracted from the stomachs of calves and contains enzymes that are used in the cheese making process. Bellow are quotes from scholars of the four schools:

Al Mabsoot, a Hannafi reference, states: “Cheese is halal even if it is made by Zoroastrians (polytheists of Persia who used to worship fire) because it is narrated that a servant of Salman al Farisi, when he was a governor of al Mada’in, brought him a basket full of cheese along with some bread and a knife. Salman (ra) would cut pieces of the cheese and hand it out to his companions and would explain to them how cheese is made.”

The Maliki book, Manh al Jaleel says that “Imam Malik disliked cheese because it was made by rennet of animals that are not slaughtered according to Sharia rules (maitah).” The author quotes another Maliki scholar, Abu Ishaaq al Tunusi as saying that “the cheese of the Zoroastrians is definitely haram but the cheese of the people of the book is halal.”

In Sharh al Bahja, a Shafi’I reference, cheese is allowed as long as the rennet is obtained from a properly slaughtered halal animal that is only feeding on milk otherwise the contents of its stomach are najis (impure).

Kashaaf al Qinaa’ in Hanbali fiqh states that the cheese of the Zoroastrians and other polytheists is allowed even if it is made from rennet of animals they slaughtered. Which means that the cheese made by the People of the Book is also allowed.

By far the most detailed in his discussion of the topic is Ibn Taymiyyah. He talks about it in the fatawa v4-p396, v5-p29, and v9-p218, 240 and 241.

He states that there are two opinions regarding the cheese of the animal that is not slaughtered according to sharia rules. According to Imam Abu Hanifa and one narration from Imam Ahmad it is halal (keep in mind that we are talking about the rennet and not the meat of the animal). The other opinion is that it is najis and that is according to Imam Malik, al Shafi’i, and the other narration from Imam Ahmad. The stronger opinion is that it is halal because when the Sahaba opened the land of Iraq they ate from the cheese of the Zoroastrians and this was common among them.

Ibn Taymiyyah was further asked about the cheese imported from the Ifranj. The Ifranj is Arabic of ‘the Franks’ and this was the name given to the people of Western Europe. Since the largest group among the early crusading armies where the French, the Arabs called all the peoples of Western Europe Ifranj.

The summary of Ibn Taymiyyah’s answer is that the reason some say their cheese is haram is because when they ship it by sea they seal it with lard and secondly because they do not slaughter their cows but they kill them by striking their heads. He responds to the first concern by saying that sealing the cheese with lard does not make it all impure but only the parts that touch the lard. If that part is removed the rest is halal. Rasulullah was asked about a rat that falls into butter and dies. He said remove the rat and the butter around it and eat the rest. If a rat does not contaminate the butter it falls into, how can we claim that all the cheese becomes impure when the lard is only on its surface?

His response to the second concern is that it is reported that they do not kill all their animals by striking the head but they only do that with cows, and even then, they would still slaughter the cow after it falls down and this does not make the animal haram. And even if we would consider this animal to be haram there are two opinions concerning the rennet extracted from it.

In conclusion it is the opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah that cheese is halal not only if it is made by the People of the Book but even if it is made by polytheists.

Obviously these quotations from the scholars are on cheese per se and do not take into account the economical boycott considerations that Muslims may have against certain nations.

Some of our historians mention that a barbaric polytheistic people would raid al Andalus every now and then. These where from the Scandinavian states. They were Danish, Swedish or Norwegian. They were men of the sea and would attack the Muslim coastal areas of the Iberian peninsula and kill and pillage before disappearing again into the seas. They once reached all the way up to Seville but where driven out back to the sea after a total stay of around forty days. Some of them stayed behind in al Andalus in a place called Shuraish and became Muslim and lived on raising cows. Since they were experts in dairy products, the cheese of Shuraish became famous and they would make a pastry from it called mujabinaat. Apparently this treat was so good there was a famous saying in al Andalus that “whoever visits Shuraish and does not have mujabinaat is deprived.” There are even lines of poetry talking about mujabinaat. Talk about fans of cheese!

One of the characteristics of a humiliated and oppressed community is their submission to their oppressor and their tolerance of oppression. On the other hand they are arrogant and intolerant among themselves. This is how it was with Banu Israel when living under the Pharaoh. I am sorry to state this but unfortunately this attitude is been reflected by many American Muslims who humiliated themselves by voting for candidates who have no serious concern for their issues.
I mentioned in my previous post:

The perception the American Muslims are giving is that by giving them nothing substantial and by giving them just a little bit of recognition you can get their support, vote and loyalty even if you carry on your war against their brothers and sisters. Just like a dog owner abusing his dog but as long as the bone is thrown out the dog will still give his owner all his loyalty. It is sad but true.

The American Muslims who decided to vote have made a fool out of themselves and the whole world knows it.
Under the heading:”America’s outcast Muslims: Once Bush backers, Muslims today are staunch Democrats. But both Obama and McCain shun them.” The UK’s The Guardian states: “American Muslims have been called the “outcasts” of this presidential election. Muslims themselves have told the media that Islam is being treated as “political leprosy”, a “scarlet letter”, or the “kiss of death”".
Why not just call them house Negros?

The Australian newspaper The Age says: “Neither campaign courts America’s Muslim vote.” they go on to state that: “Neither presidential candidate has made a single visit to a mosque.” If they didn’t even bother to visit a mosque, which is no more than a ceremonial thing anyway but does make the house Negros happy, how can one expect from them any support on our issues? Nevertheless the proud American Muslims have been running around in service of both candidates.
Many American Muslims still insisted on voting. Chasing a mirage that somehow the new president will improve their lot. First it was Bush now Obama. There is a striking similarity between the American Muslim community and the Muslims of al Andalus who chose to stay behind after Muslim Spain fell into the hands of the Catholic monarchs. There are some writings that reveal that after all the oppression they suffered they still had hope that their situation would improve, even after the Catholic monarchs showed them the worst treatment. Since there were no elections back then and no Barak Obama they were clinging their hopes on a Mahdi that would appear and deliver them to safety. A few decades later no Mahdi appeared and their children and grandchildren slowly but surely were loosing their identity until Islam ceased to exist all together in the Iberian peninsula. I do not believe that America would do the same because they have grown wiser and more sophisticated than their Spanish predecessors. Muslims will be allowed to pray, fast, and practice Islam as long as it is contained within the spiritual compartment. But they will not be allowed to be Muslim in the full sense of the word. The issues of Sharia law, Jihad, wala and bara, hudud, khilafah, the Quranic teachings concerning the Jews and Christians, and support of Muslim resistance fighters around the world will not be tolerated. Now the spiritual aspect will also be under attack, probably not by the government but by the society at large. The American culture will destroy their families. It will deprive their children and grandchildren of their identity. Time will be the witness.
Muslims have given their vote for free. Back in the nineties we were told that we should not expect anything back because we are not seen as a voting block (back then the prominent view among the Muslims was against participation in the elections.) Well now there is definitely a voting block and it is quite large as some reports say that the Muslim registered voters are around two million!
So what are the Muslims getting in exchange for their vote? Nothing.
Brothers and sisters you can vote, you can run around supporting the campaigns, you can stay silent about the aspects of your religion that do not appeal to your fellow citizens, you can speak out against your Muslim brothers and sisters who support the Muslim causes around the world, you can try your best to fit in and be accepted and the end result will be that you will always be seen as the enemy and you will never be accepted unless you do one thing: give up your religion.
“And never will the Jews and Christians approve of you until you follow their religion” [2:120]

With all of this activism and increased participation the situation of the American Muslims did not improve but in fact it regressed. The Bush campaign of 2000 has outreached to the Muslims more than both candidates of 2008.
Giving a fatwa calling on people to vote in democratic elections is not an easy thing. One would expect solid evidence from Quran and sunnah when inviting people to take such a step. However what I have seen is the opposite. I would ask you to read such fatawa and judge them not based on the names or numbers of scholars who are behind them but on the evidence. There was a moment in time when the majority of the scholars of the Muslim world were towing the official line of the Mu’tazila and that didnt make it right. Then look at the fatawa of scholars such as al Albani, the Lanjna da’ima, Abu Muhammad al Maqdisi, al Gabashy and many of the scholars of the salafi orientation around the world who are against participation in democratic election. That is the position of large Islamic movements and individuals such Sayed Qutb, Dr. Israr Ahmad, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, and the Salafi Jihadi movement. In Yemen prominent scholars from the Muslim Brotherhood have finally come to the conclusion that the democratic process is no more than a game that wastes the efforts of Muslims with very little gain.

In addition to that I found out that many people are asking the ones who are telling the people not to vote to bring their evidence! The burden of proof is on the ones who call others to participate in a disbelieving system, in a disbelieving country not the other way around. Anyway the evidence for not voting are all the verses of Quran that refer to governance as a right of Allah in surat al Nisa and al Bakarah, the verses talking about disavowal of the disbelievers in surat al Bakara, al Nisa and al Mumtahina, and the hadiths of Rasulullah that instruct us to be separate from the disbelievers. There are scholars who wrote detailed papers on the subject and you may find the links to them on the comments made by some brothers and sisters on my last two posts.
For those who did send me evidence for the position on voting I did respond to some of them and there remains the issue of the Muslims in Abyssinia and Yusuf (as). The response to this is very straightforward: Both the king of Abyssinia and the King of Egypt were not at war with the believers and were both very supportive of the Muslims. In addition to that, there are authentic narrations that al Najashi was Muslim and weaker ones that state that the king in the time of Yusuf became Muslim. But lets assume that this is not the case. Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of Fiqh should realize that there are stark differences on how Islam calls us to deal with those who are at war with us and those who are not. Allah says:
Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous towards them and acting justly towards them. Indeed Allah loves those who act justly. [60:8]

Now that Obama is in office we will see how these four years will unfold. I personally think that since what Obama stands for is falsehood, the justifications of the Muslims in choosing him were false and the process in which the Muslims chose him were also false we cannot expect any good to come out of falsehood.
“Indeed Allah does not amend the work of the corrupters” [10;81]

Assalamu alaykum
Your Brother
Anwar Al Awlaki

After reading all of the responses to my previous post I have this to say: Brothers and sisters before we carry this discussion any further we must agree on these three points:

1. The American leaders of today are playing the exact role of Pharaoh and Abu Jahl of yesterday and the American people of today are playing the role that the Quraish, Aad and Thamud used to play yesterday. Therefore the verses of Quran and Hadith of Rasulullah that apply to Pharaoh and Abu Jahl apply to the US leaders and the ones that apply to the Quraish, Aad and Thamud apply to the American people. The US is in a state of war with Islam and Muslims and not just against the so called extremists.
2. Democracy is a system of governance that is different than the Islamic system of government and is opposed to it and is being spread by the West in the Muslim world by force as an alternative to the Islamic Sharia law.
3. It is a duty upon us Muslims to strive through Jihad to establish the Islamic Khilafah again. This is not a far fetched idealistic objective but is a tangible realistic one if we but put the effort into achieving it. Therefore the Muslims in the West should see their stay there as temporary and not permanent because it is not feasible to establish such an Islamic state in the West and the Muslims should strive to make hijra to Islamic lands even though they are not ruled by Sharia in order to use their abilities and resources to bring back Islamic rule in Muslim land.

If you do not agree with the above three points then we cannot reach an agreement on the issue of voting because we are basing our views on two completely different platforms.

I would like to thank all of the brothers and sisters who posted comments and I will bypass all of the insults and pure opinion that were piled up on the 100+ comments on my post and focus on some of the opposing views that brought forth some reasonable arguments.

First: There are scholars who said that voting is Halal and in fact some said it is obligatory:

On the other hand there are scholars who said that voting in the democratic system is haram. But for those who say it is halal do they actually know what is happening in the US? Have they been to the mosques and seen the US politicians, male and female, speaking to the congregations that came to worship Allah on Friday? Did they hear the lies, false promises and pure hypocrisy of what these candidates are speaking inside the houses of Allah and most important of all the kufr that they utter in our places of worship? Have these scholars seen how the Muslims in the masajid are falling all over themselves in appeasement and superficial generosity towards these enemies of Allah all in the name of dawa? Have they heard the Imams using the time of the Friday sermon which should be devoted to Islamic teachings calling the Muslims to vote for the same people who will be leading the war against our Muslim brothers and sisters, and then closing with the dua “May Allah bless America”?! Have they seen our Muslim young boys and girls making fools of themselves wearing their “support Obama” T-shirts and waving Obama signs? Have they heard how the Muslims who are part of the campaigns of both candidates speak? Can they talk about wala and bara? Can they even utter any word in defense of Jihad, Khilafah or hudud which are part and parcel of our religion?

I doubt any of these scholars have factored in these issues when they gave their fatwa.

Brothers and sisters the issue is not simply dropping a vote in a ballot box. It is much more than that. It is the whole mindset and the actions that come with it.

Also most of fatawa that were used as support for voting in the US were actually referring to voting in Muslim countries so make note of this.

Second: We are choosing the lesser of the two evils and that is Obama:

I mentioned in my previous post that in the process of choosing the lesser of the two evils you are committing an even greater evil. I would add here the following: Even if you would follow the opinion of those who allow the voting in a disbelieving system when there is a clear lesser evil, in the situation we are facing there is no such clarity. In fact on most of the issues that concern Muslims there is very little difference. For example they have similar views on the war on terror and the issue of Palestine. Anyone with a simple understanding of the history of American politics would realize that on the major issues both parties share the same agenda. But even in the case where there is a clear lesser evil such as Ron Paul I would still follow the opinion of total abstinence because I believe that we are under no necessity to allow the participation in a system of disbelief, and because our participation is a tacit acceptance on our behalf to play by the rules of the democratic system.

On internal issues there are some who asked whether we should vote on issues such as same sex marriage. If you agree with me on point 3 which I mentioned before then it should not make any difference to us Muslims whether the disbelievers marry the same sex or marry dogs and donkeys. Muslims make dawa to the disbelievers and after they believe in Allah they are told what is halal and what is haram, but not until then.

One of the comments mentions the treaty of Hudaybiyyah as evidence for voting. The treaty of al Hudaybiyyah was a treaty between two parties at war. How does this relate to a voter choosing who would lead him? Muhammad (saaws) never negotiated with the disbelievers while he was in Makkah but negotiated the treaty of al Hudaybiyyah after a culmination of five years of Jihad so the Quraish knew that Muhammad (saaws) was negotiating out of strength. The case now is totally different. The perception the American Muslims are giving is that by giving them nothing substantial and by giving them just a little bit of recognition you can get their support, vote and loyalty even if you carry on your war against their brothers and sisters. Just like a dog owner abusing his dog but as long as the bone is thrown out the dog will still give his owner all his loyalty. It is sad but true. So as long as the Muslims are kissing up to the American politicians, these politicians are not going to give them back anything . The reality of the situation is that the American Muslims are desperate. They realize the implications of the war on terror on them and they understand their vulnerable position and are willing to go to extreme lengths just to be accepted and recognized. This zeal for voting and having “our voices heard” and “practicing our right” is a reflection of this mindset. Other minorities such as the Blacks, the Hispanics and the Jews are getting a lot in exchange for their vote. What are you getting? The sister wasn’t even allowed to wear her hijab behind Obama in exchange for her enthusiastic support!

Another comment mentions that the Muslims wanted the Romans to win against the Persians so this is evidence that we can support a candidate. The answer to that is when the Muslims wanted the Romans to win against the Persians, the Romans were not in a state of war with the Muslims and they have not harmed the Muslims in any way, shape or form. So how can you compare that to Muslims supporting candidates who are openly announcing war on Muslims? Quran makes it clear that we should treat the disbelievers who are peaceful with us different than the ones who show their animosity towards us.

Someone else mentions the pact of Fudool. This pact was a pact in the time of jahiliyyah where some of the people of Quraish agreed to provide support for the oppressed. Again this is different than voting. This is a binding agreement on all. If Muslims agree with non Muslims to support the oppressed then that is allowed. But how does that relate to voting? The voter takes no binding promises from the one he votes for.

There where a few comments that accused me of having little knowledge of what is going on in the US because I do not live there anymore, and others saying that as an Imam I should not speak about politics. To all of you wise men out there who are supposedly the “experts”, do you remember eight years ago that it was you who actually told us to vote for Bush, the worst US president ever as far as Muslims are concerned? Haven’t you learned from your mistakes?

The Muslim community in the US is busy with the vote and are debating who the Muslims should pick as their president. The argument presented is we are choosing between the lesser of the two evils. In reality it is more about being American and part of the system than it is about benefiting the ummah because the fact of the matter is there is no benefit in either candidate whatsoever.
Democracy in an un-Islamic system and we as Muslims should have nothing to do with it. Whether one looks at the root and history of democracy or at the reality of democracy today one can realize that it is a system that is not only different than the Islamic system but is opposed to it. Can’t you see that the West in its war against Islam is offering the democratic system as an alternative to Sharia? So if the West, which is the founder of democracy, sees democracy as an opposing system to Islam why are some Muslims still insisting on participating in it and adopting it as their political religion?
Democracy is a Western system that was founded and developed in the West and today the West, not the Muslims, have full authority and right to tell the world what democracy is and how it should be practiced and implemented. We have our own system of government and likewise it is the Muslims who are going to define it and will not allow non Muslims to meddle with our religion and teach us what is right from wrong.
Muslims should seek to avoid any forms of participation in Western democracy.
The promoters of participation in American elections argue that we are choosing the least of the two evils. This principle is correct but what they are missing is that in the process of choosing the lesser of the two evils they are committing an even greater evil . The breaking down of the psychological barrier that should exist between Muslims and non-Muslims, the erosion of the aqeedah of wala and bara (loyalty to Allah and disavowal of the enemies of Allah,) and the risk of loosing one’s religion are evils that outweigh any benefit that may come out of such participation.
Also the types of candidates that American politics has been spitting out is absolutely disgusting. I wonder how any Muslim with a grain of iman in his heart could walk up to a ballot box and cast his vote in endorsement of creatures such as Mcain or Obama?! How can a Muslim sleep with a clear conscience after he has chosen the likes of G.W. Bush? No matter how irrelevant your vote is, on the Day of Judgment you will be called to answer for it. You, under no coercion or duress, consciously chose to vote for the leader of a nation that is leading the war against Islam.
There is also a strange belief among some that if we participate in the elections of the disbelievers we will bring good to ourselves, while if we have trust in Allah and avoid the disbelievers, as He wants from us, we will be missing out on some good and would draw harm to ourselves. They are so weak they believe we can only survive in today’s word if we seek support from the enemies of Allah. But for the believers Allah is sufficient for them and they do not need to seek assistance from the leaders or the governments of the disbelievers.

There is no benefit for the ummah in voting for the new American Pharaoh

For those readers outside of the US who have no clue what the title of this post is talking about: Benjamin Franklin is the US statesman who is featured on the face of the $100 bill and George Washington is on the $1 bill.
Even though I am not an economist there is an issue on this topic that I would like to share with my brothers and sisters. Gold has been recognized as currency for thousands of years. FIAT money (Paper money) is a new invention and is only worth the political and economical strength of its issuers and the trust the world has in this political and economical strength. That is obviously the case with nations that issue paper money without gold backing such as the US.
Because the US economy is the powerhouse of the world and is the greatest economy on the face of the planet its currency enjoys the trust of the world. It has become the most recognized and it is the world’s foremost reserve currency. Today rather than commodities being valued in gold or silver they are valued in dollars. Oil for example is priced in dollars. In fact gold itself is priced in dollars.
The Messenger of Allah says: Allah has destined that whatever goes up must come down. Therefore if the US falls politically or economically the dollar falls with it.
Today America is the home of an interesting assortment of sins that are handpicked from all over the nations that existed before us: the obstinacy of the people of Nuh; the arrogance of the people of Aad; the rejection of Allah’s signs by the people of Thamud; the sodomy of the people of Lut; the financial deviance of the people of Shuayb as America is the biggest dealer and promoter of the interest based economy; the oppression of Abu Jahl et al; the greed, deception, love of the temporal life, and the bogusness of the children of Israel; along with the arrogance of the Pharaoh who had the misled notion that just because he is the leader of the most powerful nation on earth and is at the top the greatest army of his time he can somehow defeat the servants of Allah.
Brothers and Sisters this leads to the belief that the punishment of Allah is hovering over America. When? And how? Allah knows best.
So if you are one of those unfortunate folks who turned out to be living in the wrong place at the wrong time then it is advisable for you to leave. That is obviously if you take heed. Many don’t and are still living the utopia of the American dream. I am not talking about Mo and Mike who are still shaking to the tunes of MTV with their coke and big mac and are only Muslim by name, but I am talking about the practicing Muslims who sadly enough still think that the America of George W is the Abyssinia of the Negus.
Hijra for the sake of Allah will continue until the day of Judgment. If you leave with the intention of forsaking the people of sin and protecting your family from evil you would be rewarded abundantly. But not everyone has the capacity to make hijra just like there were some Muslims who could not make hijra from Makkah at the time of Rasulullah. So for those who cannot they should pray to Allah to make a way out for them and protect them from the people of transgression.
If you are a person whom Allah has bestowed wealth upon then you should avoid owning property in the US and you should diversify out of the dollar into gold and silver. Gold and silver have retained there value over history and there is no reason to think that they would not do the same in the future. In addition to this being the prudent thing to do from a financial point of view, it is also the recommended thing to do Islamicly. Muslims should not be supporting the economy of a nation that is fighting them.
Finally, for those who are contemplating purchasing a home in the US based on mortgage which is a clear form of Riba they should fear Allah. In addition to it being one of the most evil sins in Islam it is putting money in the wrong place. Allah says that He will destroy Riba. It is a promise from Allah. There is no blessing in anything based on it. What is happening in the US nowadays is a testimony to that.

I arrived at the Political Security Prison late at night so my first meal was breakfast. Before my imprisonment, I had discussions with former prisoners about how it was in jail, so there was some mental preparation for what was to come. I remember the words of one of the shuyukh who had been to this same prison. He said the food was so horrible, so I was expecting the worst. Early in the morning, while all the prisoners where asleep, I began hearing the opening of the doors and soldiers screaming at prisoners to pick up their meals. It was my turn and I was already awake. They opened my door and there were two soldiers, one holding a bucket and the other dragging a sack full of kudam. The one with the bucket took my plate and poured in it a cupful of steaming pinto beans while the other handed me six kudam. Before my imprisonment, former prisoners had specifically told me how horrible the beans were, so that was what I was expecting. But, to my surprise, the beans just tasted wonderful!
I have never bean a fan of beans. Under normal circumstances I wouldn’t eat them. But somehow now I was very pleased that I would be served such wonderful food! The beans where served in a spicy tomato sauce with bits of chili pepper. The fact that they were serving them out of buckets that where identical to the ones we used in the restrooms (although they were not the same ones) was not really appetizing, but in jail one is not particular about such trivialities. However it happened once that the food bucket was not cleaned so the soldier just picked up a restroom bucket instead and served us our meal out of it.
So far I was happy; then came lunch. Now there were two soldiers carrying two buckets, one had rice the other had a vegetable stew. The rice was brownish in color so it must have been cooked with some stew in it, and to my surprise there was cardamon, cloves, and bits of cinnamon mixed with it. Because many readers of this blog may be brothers and sisters who are used to eating basmati rice, I want to note here that this was no basmati rice. This was a very bad quality rice that either came from the US or Egypt or some other country that produces rice that is short and fat and totally out of shape, rather than the tall and slim basmati.
The vegetable stew was mostly potato with some squash, tomato, okra, and carrots thrown in. It had possibly been cooked with chicken that had been taken out to be served to the wardens because I once discovered a small piece of chicken meat in it.
Again, under normal circumstances I would not have had the appetite to eat such a meal but probably because I had such low expectations, the food was appealing to me. Dinner was identical to breakfast.
The next day we where served kidney beans for breakfast and dinner. The following fava beans and the following lentils. This carried on for a while but after that we would be served mostly pinto beans while kidney beans and fava beans only once in a while. Lentils disappeared forever. For lunch we were served rice and stew for eternity.
After a few weeks I began to feel the same as every other prisoner I had met; this food stinks. Alhamdulillah, by then I was allowed to purchase some food items from outside such as yogurt, fruit, and tuna. I was also allowed to get hot food from home twice a week. However the prison administration would use this as a method to pressure prisoners. Under the pretext of searching our food for contraband items I would sometimes receive my food in an inedible state. They once mashed together my rice, chocolate cake and salad and then poured over it a package of cranberry juice. Even the guard who delivered the meal to me was saddened by the state of my food. I waited an entire week to receive some proper food from my family and then this is what I got. The issue here is not only that this is proper food served from one’s home, but it is also the memory of one’s family that he misses. It is the house where the food was cooked and the hands that cooked it. So for them to mess with it in such a way, is a violation of one’s sanctity and what the prisoner holds dear. What was even worse is that my family was being told that I was allowed to have food from home twice a week and then they stole that food altogether for a period of over two months because they claimed that I was uncooperative with the investigators. I made an issue out of it and eventually I would receive my food and they would search it without mixing the different items together. However, this improvement only came when I moved from my underground cell to the ground floor.
On the ground floor there was another major improvement; each wing had access to an electric boiler. This allowed us to make tea, coffee and Indomie noodles (instant noodles).
The best treat was at Eid. For each Eid we would be served beef for lunch for three days. Because this was such a monumental change in prison diet, prisoners would talk about this for weeks before and after Eid. All of this makes me wonder how we have taken for granted all that Allah has blessed us with.
O Allah we thank you and praise you for all that you have given us. O Allah we ask you to make us from your grateful servants.

Assalamu alaykum All,
Ramadan Mubarak to all of you. We ask Allah to guide us to the best deeds and to accept from us our fasting and prayers.
Ramadan is the month of Quran and generosity. In Abbas says: “I have never seen anyone more generous than Rasulullah, and he would be most generous in Ramadan when Gibril would read Quran with him”
Imam Malik used to close the books of hadith and fiqh in Ramadan and devote his time to Quran.
Allah says: “The month of Ramadan in which Quran was revealed.” So the revelation of Quran began in Ramadan.
Therefore dear brothers and sisters we should focus on Quran during the holy month.
Lets not forget too that the month of Ramadan was a time when great battles were fought such as the battle of the criterion, the battle of Badr, and the greatest conquest, the opening of Makkah. There is also the important battle that saved the Muslims from the Mongol invasion, the battle of Ayn Jalut. So we should not forget our brothers who are carrying on this duty today from our dua and support.
Lastly, we need to keep in mind that while we are enjoying the blessing of freedom and having iftar with our families that we have thousands of brothers behind bars and only Allah knows what conditions they are in and there are thousands of families who are deprived the presence of their loved ones. Lets pray for them during this blessed month.
O Allah free our Muslim brothers from the prisons of the tyrants and shower on them and their families Your mercy. O Allah accept our good deeds and forgive us our mistakes.
Assalamu alaykum

Question:

Salam Alakum. What I understand from your lectures is that you believe the

method to re-establish Khilafah is through Jihad. Can you respond to this?

“Another view that is being addressed to the Ummah is the concept of fighting

the rulers and that through military struggle Islam will return to the world

stage. Again this is based upon a particular Hadith. It has been narrated from

many sources including Imam Muslim that the Prophet (saw) said, .Do not

challenge the people of authority unless you see explicit Kufr of which you have

clear proof from Allah(from Islam).. Ibn Kathir in his Tafseer states that if

the Khaleefah reverts to the rule of disbelief, he would be fought until he

returned to the implementation of Islam and the Shari’ah.

Ibn Hajr in his Fateh al-Bari also states that if he becomes a Kafir, or

changes the Shari.ah he should be fought and removed. 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 over 76 years, 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 it.s 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.

The only situation that is comparable from the evidences is the establishment

of the Islamic State for the very first time by the Prophet(saw) and the

struggle which he (saw) went through in order to establish this State and change

Dar ul-Kufr to Dar ul-Islam. This is the struggle which he (saw) referred to in

the Hadith of Hamza and as is illustrated in the Books of Sunnah and Seerah. As

that is the only instance in which a complete system of Kufr existed and was

changed to a complete system of Islam. So the matter is regarding the changing

of a system, not merely a ruler. The Ahadith of fighting, apply to changing a

ruler i.e. a Khaleefah who has gone astray not a system, only the struggle of

the Prophet (saw) in Makkah applies to the changing of a system. So military

struggle is not the method of re-establishing the Khilafah.”

- Also, can you give me your views on Hizb ut-Tahrir. JazakAllah Khair. Salam

Alakum.

Answer:

Most Islamic groups that were founded after the fall of the khilafa recognize the importance of re-establishing al khilafa again. There was a time during the decades of the eighties and nineties when the Salafi’s, Ikhwaan, Jamaat Islami, HT, Jihad groups and even some of the sufi’s talked about khilafah. Since then and because of the fact that the West has made it clear that it doesn’t like that idea and would not tolerate it, some groups have backed off completely from any talk of khilafah while others toned it down. Only a few remained steadfast in their call to establish the Islamic system again.

The proposed methods that Islamic groups presented for re-establishing al Khilafah are:

1. Through tarbiyyah and then somehow when our condition changes the khilafa will be re-established again. While others say we will do tarbiyyah until the ummah is ready and then we will fight the enemies of Allah.

2. By reaching to power through participating in the democratic system.

3. The HT method of raising the awareness of the ummah of the importance of khilafa, educating the Muslims on politics, and searching for nusrah.

4. Fighting in path of Allah in order to establish the religion of Allah.

The proponents of the first method have never given the ummah any benchmark to when we have done sufficient tarbiyyah to move on to the stage of implementation and therefore will remain in a perpetual state of tarbiyyah while negating the duty of Jihad.

They also miss the point that tarbiyyah is within one generation and not multigenerational. Meaning the change that Rasulullah brought which started with dawa and ended with jihad was within the lifetime of one generation. It all happened within 23 years. Every other successful change in the ummah occurred within one generation. History is a testimony to this.

The promoters of change by participation in democratic elections started out by stating that democracy is kufr and we do not believe in it but we are using it as a vehicle to reach to power and after we reach to power we will implement Islam. This is what I heard from every single leading member of Ikhwaan in the late eighties and early nineties. I clearly remember the public discussions that were held on this issue because the Salafi’s back then were very much against Ikhwaan on this point. I also remember clearly the private discussion I had with some of the shuyukh of ikhwaan who would reiterate the same point again and again: Democracy is un-Islamic and we are participating in elections but our intentions are to change the system from within.

There are three problems with this method:

First: It is a deception and a lie to use democracy and claim to be adherents to the democratic system but not believe in it. Now deception is acceptable against the enemy if the Muslims are in a state of war with the them. The problem is that the particular groups that are involved in the democratic process do not believe that they are in a state of war with the disbelievers but believe that there is a covenant between the Muslims and the disbelievers. So if we are in a covenant with the disbelievers then it is not allowed to use deception against them and it is not allowed to lie to them. That’s the first problem.

The next problem is that when you repeat a lie long enough you end up believing it. For those who knew these groups from the eighties it is strange for them to see how much they have changed over time. Now they are saying and I have heard this more than once from their prominent members that now we genuinely do believe in the democratic system. We believe in the ballot not bullet. And if the ballot decides that a secular or disbelieving party wins we will accept that.

As Muslims we should not subject Islam to the whims of the people, if they chose it we implement it, if they don’t we accept the choice of the masses. Our position is that we will implement the rule of Allah on earth by the tip of the sword whether the masses like it or not. We will not subject sharia rule to popularity contests. Rasulullah says: I was sent with the sword until Allah alone is worshiped. That path, the path of Rasulullah, is the path we should follow.

The final problem is that the Muslims’ method is not a method of infiltration. Muslims do not try to infiltrate the system and work from within. It is just not our way. It is the way of the Jews and the munafiqeen but not the way of the Muslims. We are honest and straightforward with friend and foe. We make our intentions open and we declare our dawah publicly, “For you is your religion, and for me is my religion.” We do not want to infiltrate the system whether in America or in a Muslim country. The Jews are the ones who have infiltrated every government they lived under whether it was al-Andalus and the Ottoman khilafah or the Western governments of today. They have a hidden agenda, we don’t. The Jews and their brethren, the hypocrites, tried to infiltrate the government of Rasulullah and were exposed by Quran:

“And a faction of the People of the Scripture say [to each other], “Believe in that which was revealed to the believers at the beginning of the day and reject it at its end that perhaps they will return [i.e., abandon their religion]”

So they would become believers and come in to the community only to leave it at the end of the day. Allah also talks about the hypocrites who would sit among the believers and convey what they hear to the Jews.

Therefore for those who say that we should be involved with the system and change it from within are not following the path of the Muslims and if their character is that of a Muslim they would fail because infiltration just doesn’t work with Muslim behavior. But if they do succeed in infiltrating the system then that is proof that their character has become that of the Jews or the hypocrites and not that of the Muslims.

A point related to this is that those who come from Islamic backgrounds and have spent a long time working within the political systems of today end up becoming politicians, with all the negative meanings of the word: deceptive, changing colors, materialistic and Machiavellian in their methods. They may have been bred in the Islamic movements’ strong tarbiyyiah programs but after a while in the political arena they become the wolves they were trying to change. I have seen this with my own eyes happen to people that I know and as one leader of the Islamic movement in Yemen said: “We send them as sheep into a world of wolves only for them to come back to us as an eaten up skeleton.” If you want a live example of what working from within the system produces look no further than Sudan and Turkey. The ruling parties in both countries started out as Islamists only to end up just like everyone else in their rotten and corrupt environments.

Regarding the method of HT which you specifically referred to in your question, I first came in contact with HT members from Jordan in the early nineties and found them to be argumentative but well-mannered and polite. My first understanding of the Hizb was from them and they were core members of the group. HT has played an important role in raising the awareness of the ummah to the matter of khilafa. They also played a role in countering the false idea that politics and political awareness have nothing to do with Islam. However the method of HT to re-establish khilfah is simply not going to work. To wait for nusrah until it arrives is to wait for a miracle. Tribes or military generals that are supposed to give nusrah and establish the religion of Allah are not going to be won over simply by discussions. They will only be won over when they see a group of believers living by what they say and sacrifice all that they own for the sake of Allah. This is what will inspire others to join. The two success stories of powerful people giving nusrah to the religion are some of the former officers of the Iraqi baath regime who joined the insurgency and the former president of Chechnya, Dudayev, who was a high ranking officer in the Soviet army. Both these successful examples of nusra were not won over through debates, demonstrations and pamphlets but by them seeing a living example of men struggling in the path of Allah.

This leads me to the forth method of re-establishing khilafa and that is through Jihad fi sabilillah. The argument that you presented against this is that the only similar situation to our situation now is that of Rasulullah establishing an Islamic state first and then fighting Jihad. You are neglecting a serious difference and that is when Rasulullah established Madina there was no Islamic land that was invaded. Isn’t this a serious and major difference? Today the Muslim world is under occupation and the statements of our scholars are clear that it becomes fardh ayn on every able Muslim to fight to free the Muslim land. When something is fardh ayn it is fardh ayn. You cannot theorize or hypothesize otherwise. The ruling is clear and the implications of it are clear. So even if you do not believe Jihad to be the way to establish khilafah you must agree that Jihad is fardh ayn and that is not where HT stands. Also the jihad which is fardh ayn and is Jihad al dafa (defensive Jihad) does not require the one who wants to participate to seek the permission of the Imam, parents, husband, slave owner, or lender.

Also why should we argue on this point when we see the evidence of it in the real world. The two most successful examples, even though far from perfect, of Islamic rule in this past decade were the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Islamic courts in Somalia. In both countries only these Muslim fighters brought peace, security and rule of law in both countries. Both movements reached to power not through elections or debates but through war. They did not fall because they were failures but they fell because the ummah failed them. However, even though a battle here and there were lost but the war is not over. If you follow the current events and look at them with an attentive eye you would realize that it is the enemy who is bleeding to death not the Muslim fighters. Pretty soon the scales will tip.

Because confusion usually surrounds what is meant by Jihad whether it is the Jihad al Nafs or Jihad of the sword I do not exclusively mean one or the other and I do not exclude one or the other. What I mean by Jihad here is not just picking up a gun and fighting. Jihad is broader than that. What is meant by Jihad in this context is a total effort by the ummah to fight and defeat its enemy. Rasulullah says: Fight the disbelievers with your self, your wealth and your tongues. It is what Clausewitz would refer to as “total war” but with the Islamic rules of engagement. It is a battle in the battlefield and a battle for the hearts and minds of the people.

I am done with my book reviews, so now let’s take a culinary tour of prison. The first item on the list is kudam.
The definition of kudam is a unique creature that exists on Yemeni military bases and prisons. It is the plural of kudma or kidma. The unique thing about kudam is that no two are equal in shape or color. The color can range anywhere from off-white to black. The shape of kudam does not conform to known geometric shapes. To a first time observer, they might appear to be visitors from outer space. Their size is usually equal to a large fist.
Do you have any idea what kudam really are?
Kudam are the staple breads of prisoners and soldiers in Yemen. They are fascinating pieces of art.
Kudam are transported from bakeries to military basis and prisons around the country on open flatbed trucks and are therefore subjected to wind, dust, sun, rain and the various forms of life that would naturally want to devour them. However kudam are pretty resistant to the elements, with the exception of rain, which they never handle well.
Kudam are supposed to be multigrain. That is how it was in the old days. Now they are most likely whole-wheat. They are fermented so their taste resembles San Francisco’s sourdough bread (those who live in America would know what I am talking about). They consist of a solid crust (and I mean really solid); they could be used for fights. They are covered with a layer of loose flour plus whatever particles have become attached to them along their route to prison, such as dust. Inside this hard crust, they are soft and tasty. They are mouth watering when hot, but unfortunately we only received them hot for sahur during Ramadan.
The ration for every prisoner is 6 kudam, which works out as 2 for breakfast, 2 for lunch, and 2 for dinner, but you get them all before breakfast.
There is a traditional way of eating kudam that is unfortunately dying just like all other wonderful customs. The traditional way of ‘breaking in’ to kudam is that you hold one kudma in each hand and then slam them together as hard as you can. This takes care of breaking loose all the foreign particles and flour that is hanging on to the surface. It also breaks the crust. This tradition is mostly lost among the prisoners, who may not have had enough exposure to kudam before incarceration, but I used to see the prison wardens always do it.

Next: Food Review 2: Everything Else.