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!

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

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?

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

Right Click to save as : Another Ramadan 2008 [by Sh Anwar al Awlaki]

Surah/Chapter 008 - Al-Anfâl. Verse 72.

English Translation of the Meaning(The Noble Qur’an)
Lo! those who believed and left their homes and strove with their wealth and their lives for the cause of Allah, and those who took them in and helped them; these are protecting friends one of another. And those who believed but did not leave their homes, ye have no duty to protect them till they leave their homes; but if they seek help from you in the matter of religion then it is your duty to help (them) except against a folk between whom and you there is a treaty. Allah is Seer of what ye do.

[right click and save as to download MP3]

Imam Anwar al-Awlaki is a Muslim scholar of Yemeni heritage, born in the United States. He earned his Masters Degree in Educational Leadership from San Diego State University and served as an Imam in San Diego, and later in the Washington, D.C. area, where he headed the Dar Al-Hijrah Islamic Center. Imam Anwar was also the Muslim Chaplain at George Washington University. He is the author of many audio lectures, including the popular series on the “Lives of the Prophets.”
In 2004, he returned to his native Yemen and was banned from re-entering the U.S. despite having American citizenship. According to reports, he was illegally detained by Yemeni police at the behest of the U.S.
Imam Anwar was released from custody on December 12, 2007, having spent a year and a half behind bars. In this interview with InFocus, Imam Anwar spoke from Yemen, reflecting on his past, and talking about the present and future.

InFocus: It’s been nearly a year now since you were released from custody. Upon being released from custody, you called the time you spent in detention a “great blessing from Allah.” Why do you feel that way?Imam Anwar: It was a chance to review Qur’an and to study and read in a way that was impossible out of jail. My time in detention was a vacation from this world.

IF: Have you taken a moment to reflect on that whole ordeal? What did you take away from it?
IA: I still see my detention as a blessing and I believe that I am still enjoying the fruits of those blessings until this moment.

IF: Do you have an even greater appreciation for things that we all maybe take for granted?
IA: Yes, everything is a blessing from Allah. For example I never really liked beans. However in prison I would have beans for breakfast and dinner and they just tasted wonderful. Another example, in my cell the light was on 24 hours a day so when the light bulb went off it was such a blessing to be in darkness for a few days until the bulb was fixed. Even darkness is a blessing we take for granted

IF: What were the conditions like for you in prison?
IA: In general, they were okay.

IF: My understanding is that you were actually just being “held” during the entire time in prison. You were never even charged with a crime, let alone convicted of one, yet you still served time in prison. Is that accurate and if so, do you even now wonder exactly why you were imprisoned?
IA: Yes that is true. I was taken into custody without any explanation and released without any explanation.

IF: You’re an American, born in New Mexico , but according to numerous reports, your detention was ordered by U.S. officials. Do you believe that?
IA: Yes, I believe that I was held at the request of the United States government.

IF: You’ve said in your lectures that the U.S. government has made false accusations against a number of Muslim leaders in America, so you’re not the only one. In your opinion, why does the U.S. feel threatened by Muslim leaders?
IA: The US has taken Islam as its enemy just like Abu Jahl did and for the same reasons. I do not see much of a difference between the US on one hand and Pharaoh, [the] A’ad, Thamud, and the people of [Prophet] Noah on the other. They’re one and the same.

IF: One of your most recent lectures is titled “Battle of the Hearts & Minds,” in which you talk about lies and propaganda. Would you briefly summarize the point of this lecture for our readers?
IA: There has been a plethora of reports from governmental and non-governmental sources on how to defeat what they perceive as the Islamic danger. For example RAND Corporation, which is a think tank affiliated to the Pentagon, has issued a couple of reports on this. They have openly stated that they are unhappy with the way Islam is and want to change it. They then proceed to delineate the characteristics of their version of Islam and how to promote it. They also describe the type of Muslims that they think might be willing to prescribe to this “Rand Islam.” Because they understand that the masses in the Muslim world have lost trust in the US, they state that the US hand in this effort should be hidden and that their Muslim stooges should be in the forefront.

IF: What tips would you give to Muslims living in the U.S. to win this battle of the hearts and minds?
IA: Muslims need to be able to tell the difference between the real Islam and the RAND Islam and they need to know who their enemy is. Living in the West, they also have a responsibility of refuting such attempts of changing the religion of Allah.

IF: Please talk about another recent lecture you delivered, “The Dust Will Never Settle Down.” Was it your response to all the recent attacks on the character of Prophet Muhammad? It caused quite a bit of controversy – so much so that you had to address many questions about it on your blog.
IA: Yes that lecture was in response to how the West has been dealing with the great person of Muhammad lately. As you stated, it did cause some controversy and a lot of responses. Some were staunchly in support of what I have said, while others were angrily against. I have backed up everything in there with solid evidence from Qur’an, Hadith and statements of scholars and I stand behind every word in it.

IF: What can we look forward to from you in the near future, insha’Allah (God-willing)?
IA: I am currently working on the last part of the Seerah of Muhammad. Insha’Allah it should be done within a few months. For a long time I have wanted to do a series on the Crusades and on al-Andalus so these are some ideas for the future.

IF: Are you allowed to travel outside of Yemen? If so, do you have any intention to return to the U.S. ?
IA: There are no official restrictions on my travel. However, I do not intend on doing any travelling at the moment.
IF: You must know by now the outpouring of support during your incarceration and since your release. How does that make you feel?
IA: Alhamdulillah I am very grateful to my Muslim brothers and sisters for that. I was also amazed by the amount of email that I received after my release. I thank all my brothers and sisters and ask Allah to reward them abundantly.
IF: Is there anything else you would like to share with our readers?
IA: We need to take our religion more seriously. Islam is not something that we use to fill in the spiritual compartment of our life while we leave everything else to our whims and desires. Islam should rule over every aspect of our life.

http://www.infocusnews.net/content/view/25232/683/