HAhmed.com

10 Responses to “Imam Zaid Shakir: The Life of a Muslim “Rock Star””

1. 1 burhan from: United States us Jul 8th, 2009 at 4:01 pm

   Good lord. We’re a dumb species.

2. 2 Ahmed from: France fr Jul 8th, 2009 at 5:17 pm

   Do you mind posting this up on MM. They are censoring me:

   @ Iesa

   Assalamu ‘alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh,

   Again, thank you for responding to my comments about your article. In the future though, can you make the feedback process a little bit smoother; I felt like it was a challenge simply getting my views up on this site and getting constructive criticism back.

   Also, do you mind putting up my whole comment. The other half, and I think it contains most of my significant points, is still awaiting moderation.

   That said I would like to respond to some of the issues you raised in your response and clarify some of the initial issues.

   Here goes:

   With regards to the argument you keep repeating about the article not being about you or the views not being yours, I agree that that is indeed the case. The argument I am making is a broader one, that doesn’t necessarily have a lot do with you personally, which is that as a media outlet the viewpoints and opinions that you consistently give way to, without challenge, are your opinions and arguments by default. I think that’s a generally established fact in the world of media studies. So for you to cry “these are not my arguments” is a bit puzzling.

   As far as my post being characterized as one of “attacking”, I would ask what about my post is particularly hostile? I make neither insults nor threaten anybody in my post and I maintain throughout it logical and straightforward arguments. I don’t feel anything in my comment is unfair or out of place, as far as manners of argument go. When does a comment become out of line? When it challenges your view-points, all of a sudden I am “attacking” you? If you can point out where I stepped out of bounds in my manners of debate, I would love to know so I could rectify that in the future, insha’Allah .

   As far of your charge that I am “assuming knowledge of” your “beliefs” and peering into your heart to look at the ghayb (Unseen), I think that is a grave charge and it offends me. Like I explained, the views and opinions you consistently present as a media body, without allowing for the other side to at least rebut, are representative of the biases of your reporting. Otherwise, why would you give me such a hassle in countering Mr. Galloway’s arguments? Also, aside from simple journalistic integrity, lets not lose sight of the fact that you have an obligation, as a Muslim media organisation, to be Islamically responsible in your reporting. As a matter of principle I don’t think it was Islamically responsible for you to air the views of a disbeliever who is far, far away from the Islamic methodology without at least a disclaimer. Just so I am clear, what I am referring to when I say Islamically irresponsible are the following points I mentioned in my previous comment:

   “By the consistent promotion of non-believers like Galloway as “the authority” on this issue you establish the basis upon which this issue will be approached… and I think you realize this. That means the issue of our holy mosque and holy land is presented as an issue of:

   -Secular nationalism
   -Civil rights
   -Human rights
   -Self-determination
   -Political activism

   I think its fair to say that to the bulk of the 1 billion Muslims on this earth, when you bring up this issue these are not the words that immediately come to mind.”

   If you are bothered by the claim that you are promoting “secular nationalism”, then let me hear a clear statement that you do not support a secular nationalistic state of “Palestine” (otherwise that’s the idea readers would get) and instead support the Islamic principle that the government legislated by Allah (SWT) in His Book and on the tongue of His Messenger (SAW) is the government that takes as its constitution the Qur’an and the Sunnah and is a Muslim state that in all its laws and customs abides by the commands of Allah (SWT).

   About your counter-counterpoint #1)

   Yes, I mentioned Salahudeen and I, in fact, don’t hold him only to his success in “liberating Palestine” but what I intended in mentioning him is to establish some points. When I ask you these questions, they are heart to heart, muslim to muslim, and I ask you them in the spirit of brotherhood and the search for truth and following it, so please take me seriously and don’t respond with ridicule and arrogance:

   By Al-’Asr (the time). Verily! Man is in loss, Except those who believe and do righteous good deeds, and recommend one another to the truth, and recommend one another to patience. (1-3. 103)

   What do we mean when we say Salahudeen “liberated” Palestine? Don’t we mean that he routed the Crusader army at Hittin, marched to Al-Quds, abolished the Crusader “Kingdom of Jerusalem”, and the government and authority in Al-Quds returned to the Muslims under the “Ayyubid dynasty of Saladin”? If you accept that reading of events, then a perfectly synonymous turn of events today would go something like this:

   “X routed the Zionist army at X, marched to Al-Quds, abolished the Zionist “State of Israel”, and the government and authority in Al-Quds returned to the Muslims under the “X dynasty of X”.

   Now if you lay claim to Salahudeen and agree with what he did, would you have the same thing happen today, with brave men following in the footsteps of his legendary example?

   As for the next point, yes it is true that today Salahudeen is universally regarded as a just figure who waged a just war and conducted himself with justice. But let me ask you, do you think that was the perception of Salahudeen in Europe back then? Clearly, the answer is no. In fact, ever since the third, of 9, crusades, Christian Europe fought to recapture Al-Quds from Salahudeen, long after his death. That is all to say, that if we expect that someone will raise the banner of Jihad to liberate Al-Quds today and not be called a “terrorist”…then we are sorely misguided. As for the issues of treatises and contracts of peace, then if you are drawing a constrast between Salahudeen and the contemporary Mujahidin, then I would just like to clarify that the Mujahidin like Salahudeen before them have consistently offered peace and treaties to the Yahood and her supporters, chiefly America, as recently as June 2, when Mustafa Abu al-Yazid, the leader of al Qaeda’s operation in Afghanistan, said in an interview with Al Jazeera television what is summarized below:

   “Abu Al-Yazid set out five conditions: “to withdraw from Muslim countries, stop supporting the occupant (Israel) in Palestine, end the support of apostate governments and usurpers of power in Muslim countries, stop any aggression against the Muslims and release all Muslim prisoners in US prisons.”

   “In this case, there will be a truce between us of, for example, ten years,” said Abu Al-Yazid.

   “We will invite them to convert to Islam. If they refuse to convert, we will impose Jiziah on them (a tax paid by non-Muslims who live under the rule of a Muslim government). If they refuse, there will be war,” warned the number three of the terrorist network (after Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri).

   “But we believe they will refuse. Therefore, the Nation of Islam is called to prepare for jihad.”"

   http://www.middle-east-online.com/English/?id=32906

   But if people expect peace and treaties when the above-mentioned conditions are not met, then that is not called a peace treaty, that is called surrender.

   Yes, I also believe that the Shari’a provides us with many tools to stand against oppression and I also believe that we should use all of them, including military force or, as it is called in Islam, Jihad. Do you also agree that we should use all of our tools including military force, or that we should use all of our tools except military force? If it is the latter, then how do you expect to liberate Palestine? “Please, Mr. Netanyahu, I hope you can recognize the legitimacy of my claims to this land and how you have illegally settled our land and our homes after driving us out of them through demolitions and genocide. I put my faith in your kindness and integrity, that you will simply return this land to us and to our authority just on the basis that it is the right thing to do.”?

   Also with regards to your statement:

   “Furthermore, with no Amir of the Believers, no Islamic state, no unity among the Ummah, the authoritative representation of a unified Muslim position – let alone, just military action – is not pragmatic.”

   In fact, not only do we have an Amir of the Believers, we actually have 2:

   Amir al-Mu’minin Mulla Muhammad Omar, Amir of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan

   Amir al-Mu’minin Abu Omar al-Qurashi al-Baghdadi, Amir of the Islamic State of Iraq

   Preferably we should only have one Amir as the Prophet (SAW) taught us, but these leaders don’t claim to be the Khalifa and call their states Caliphates but instead an Imaara’ and Dawla respectively, so they exercise control over their respective regions (as was the case many times in Islamic history). And Insha’Allah when Allah defeats the enemy and establishes us on the earth, one of these men will assume the role of Khalif over an Islamic Caliphate…the one the Prophet (SAW) prophecised was to come at the end of times: “khilaafa ‘alaa minhaj an-nubawaa - a Caliphate upon the prophetic methodology. So why don’t you recognise these men? Are you waiting for the U.N., the U.S, and Europe to “recognize” them, change their maps, and send a delegation from the United Nations to Kandahar to assume diplomatic ties with the Ameer? If that is what people are waiting for, then they have never read a page of Islamic history. These men will be recognized when the West can no longer pretend they don’t exist. Now, obviously, these men and their soldiers are currently in a full-scale war with the most advanced military power the world has ever known, and that’s what the fight over there is about, and once they achieve victory, Insha’Allah , the issue will become even clearer.

   And of course, we have 2 Islamic States as I mentioned, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and the Islamic State of Iraq, and we have a Wilaayah (Province) in Somali as declared by the Mujahideen there, and in time they will come under the authority of the state that emerges under the current circumstances in Iraq and Afghanistan.

   And of course we have unity among the Ummah and we do indeed have an “authoritative representation of a unified Muslim position” however much it can still be built upon and improved. We all agree:

   -We want to liberate our lands that are under enemy occupation
   -We want to spread the message of Islam, through the sword and the pen
   -We want Shari’a and not Secular law
   -We want our enemies to stop massacring us
   -We want our enemies to stop exploiting our natural resources
   -We want safety, security, and opportunity in our lands
   -We want to defend ourselves against anyone who threatens us

   So who disagrees with that? Are you waiting for there to exist no Munaafiqeen and traitors in the Ummah…that will never happen because were it to happen it would have happened in the Prophet (SAW)’s time, when we know there was a whole movement of Nifaq, headed by Ubay’ Ibn Salul, so how much more in our time which the prophet described in the Hadith:

   “Just before the Anti-Christ there will be years of great deception in which people will disbelieve one who tells the truth and believe the liar. They will distrust one who is trustworthy and trust one who is treacherous. And the ruwaybida will speak.” They asked: “What is the ruwaybida?” He said: “The minor scoundrel (al-fuwaysiq) who will have his say in general affairs.” Narrated from Anas by Ahmad

   So your statement is out of line with reality when in fact we do have the sort of centralized authority figures who are capable of leading this ummah that you pretend we don’t. We also know that the defeatist paradigm that that comment comes from is wrong. The one that says we are not able to confront our enemies militarily, we are too weak, “oh, what would we do if America left the region!”, and so on. The ummah is more than capable of confronting and defeating its enemies in battle and to prove that just consider the fact that after 9/11 the Mujahidin have faced the full force of America’s might head on and where does the battle stand now? The answer is obvious. Also consider that that force of the Mujahidin is what compared to the full resources, manpower, strength, wealth, and collective will of the ummah? 0.0001%, 1%, 2%, maybe 3%? So how about if 10% of the ummah engaged in this struggle or 20%?

   I think it’s so ironic that you state the following: “Understand, by the meaning of the word deen (religion) which for us should equate to the complete way in which we live our lives, means we should not separate or reserve Islamic guidance for specific issues or parts of our lives. Rather, we should try to please Allah with all of our actions. ” If you don’t see the irony in your statement, I simply challenge you to go back to the Aaayaat and Ahaadith of Jihad and evaluate the place Allah reserved for it in the life of a Muslim and compare that to its place in the life you advocate for the ummah here on MM.

   As for your saying: “My position that Islam allows for much more variety of action than you seem comfortable with.” My position is that when Allah (SWT) unequivically orders us with a command I am not comfortable disobeying Him (SWT):

   O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah , ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; but Him ye would not harm in the least. For Allah hath power over all things. (38, 39. 9)

   Do you think there is “variety of action” here?

   About your counter-counterpoint #2)

   Yes, absolutely I am calling for taking back Andalus. What, you’re not? Isn’t the Hukm (ruling) clear? We are obligated to re-conquer that land, and the non-muslims there will be forced to pay jizya. Do you have another Hukm? My impression was that in Islam, we follow the Ahkaam (rulings); we follow the Qur’an and Sunnah. What is your impression of Islam?

   As for your statement: “In my understanding, there is no single type of governmental system enshrined in the Shari’a, however the Shari’a does give us the principles (moral guidance) from which a system of government can be administered correctly.”

   So in your understanding, there is a single type of system enshrined in the Shari’a for washing oneself, performing prayer, responding to the call of nature, having sexual relations with ones spouse, dealing with neighbors, slaughtering animals for food, and so on and so forth but when it comes to the all-important, all-encompassing, absolutely critical issue of who will exercise authority on God’s earth we simply have “moral guidance” from which “a system of government”, I take that to mean any, can manage? Think about that again for a second…do you think that is logical?

   And what of this thing we call the sunnah? Aren’t we suppose to follow all the guidance of the Prophet (SAW)? Yes, but except for all the functions of statehood, government, and politics?

   The form of government that Islam mandates is the governments of Rasullullah (SAW), Umar bin Al-Khattab (R), Umar bin Abdul-Aziz (rah), Al-Mu’tasim (rah), Harun Ar-Rashid (rah), Salahudeen Al-Ayyubi (rah), and so on up until the present with Mullah Muhammad Omar (hfdh). Were talking about the Rashidun, Ummayun, ‘Abbasiyun, Mamaalik, Ayuubiyun, Uthmaniyun, and Insha’Allah the “At-talibaniyun”:

   “Prophethood will remain among you as long as Allah wills. Then Caliphate (Khilafah) on the lines of Prophethood shall commence, and remain as long as Allah wills. Then corrupt/erosive monarchy would take place, and it will remain as long as Allah wills. After that, despotic kingship would emerge, and it will remain as long as Allah wills. Then, the Caliphate (Khilafah) shall come once again based on the precept of Prophethood.“” Ahmad.

   “It has been reported on the authority of Nafi, that ‘Abdullah b. Umar paid a visit to Abdullah b. Muti’ in the days (when atrocities were perpetrated on the People Of Medina) at Harra in the time of Yazid b. Mu’awiya. Ibn Muti’ said: Place a pillow for Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman (family name of ‘Abdullah b. ‘Umar). But the latter said: I have not come to sit with you. I have come to you to tell you a tradition I heard from the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). I heard him say: One who withdraws his band from obedience (to the Amir) will find no argument (in his defence) when he stands before Allah on the Day of Judgment, and one who dies without having bound himself by an oath of allegiance (to an Amir) will die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahillyya. ” Sahih Muslim.

   And the statements of the scholars:

   Al-Qurtubi said in his Tafsir[29] of the verse, “Indeed, man is made upon this earth a Caliph”[30] that:

   This Ayah is a source in the selection of an Imaam, and a Khaleef, he is listened to and he is obeyed, for the word is united through him, and the Ahkam (laws) of the Caliph are implemented through him, and there is no difference regarding the obligation of that between the Ummah, nor between the Imams except what is narrated about al-Asam, the Mu’tazzili …

   Al-Qurtubi also said:

   The Khilafah is the pillar upon which other pillars rest

   An-Nawawi said[31]:

   (The scholars) consented that it is an obligation upon the Muslims to select a Khalif

   Al-Ghazali when writing of the potential consequences of losing the Caliphate said[32]:

   The judges will be suspeneded, the Wilayaat (provinces) will be nullified, … the decrees of those in authority will not be executed and all the people will be on the verge of Haraam

   Ibn Taymiyyah said[33]:

   It is obligatory to know that the office in charge of commanding over the people (ie: the post of the Khaleefah) is one of the greatest obligations of the Deen. In fact, there is no establishment of the Deen except by it….this is the opinion of the salaf, such as al-Fadl ibn ‘Iyaad, Ahmad ibn Hanbal and others.

   Anyways, this comment is getting too long. Please try and respond to some of the most important points.

   May Allah guide me and you the straight path. Ameeeeen.

3. 3 Cleveland_County from: United States us Jul 9th, 2009 at 2:24 pm

   May Allah reward Imam Zaid and Shaykh Hamza! I for one appreciate the time and work they devote to our community. I pray God continues to bless them and their efforts.

4. 4 R.A from: United States us Jul 9th, 2009 at 4:36 pm

   OWNED!

5. 5 M-star from: United States us Jul 9th, 2009 at 7:43 pm

   It’s true that the web has been inundated by news about Michael Jackson but it’s just fascinating, really. Here is an article that he wrote supposedly for beliefnet.com

   http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/2000/12/My-Childhood-My-Sabbath-My-Freedom.aspx

6. 6 student from: United States us Jul 10th, 2009 at 1:16 am

   not just OWNED, but ROYALLY PWNED.

   reminds me of an Obama speech, actually: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZJex9Ge2-Q

7. 7 che from: Malaysia my Jul 11th, 2009 at 4:55 pm

   May Allah reward all people who has conribute the good deeds,every lil of it..

8. 8 che from: Malaysia my Jul 12th, 2009 at 5:59 am

   It’s a good coverage

9. 9 Malcolm from: France fr Jul 16th, 2009 at 6:45 pm

   Salamu Alaykum,

   There is a response to Imam Zaid’s post on http://www.muslimrockstar.blogspot.com

10. 10 Malcolm from: France fr Jul 16th, 2009 at 6:46 pm

    Salamu Alaykum,

    There is a response to Imam Zaid’s post on http://www.muslimrockstar.blogspot

Leave a Reply