Clarifying the Path of Tasawuff

Ahmad Zaruuq says in his Umdat `l-Murid `s-Saadiq: "Realize that jurisprudence and the tasawwuf are brothers in the proofs concerning the judgments of Allah subhaanahu wa ta`ala. This is because the reality of tasawwuf falls under the area of sincerity of attention to Allah ta`ala, while jurisprudence and the foundations of the deen are conditioned by it. For that which is conditioned can never be sound without its condition being fulfilled. Allah ta`ala says: "And the ingratitude of His servants does not please Him." For this shows the necessity for the realization of true Iman. Further Allah ta`ala says: "If you are grateful He will be pleased with you." For this shows the necessity of acting in accordance with
Islam.

Therefore, there can be no tasawwuf without jurisprudence since you cannot know the outward legal judgments of Allah except by it. Likewise, there is no jurisprudence without tasawwuf since there is no reality to knowledge except by correct actions and correct actions cannot be had except with sincerity of attention. Finally, these two (tasawwuf and jurisprudence) are not possible except by means of Iman since they cannot be sound except by means of it.

Know that the discernment of jurisprudence is confined to what will remove difficulty in ones worship. While, the discernment of the foundations of the deen is confined to what certify the principles, which are Iman and the Sunna. Finally, the discernment of tasawwuf is concerned with preparation for what will unite one to perfection, which is what is the goal in the issues of Iman and the Sunna.

This perfection is sought by the Sufi in the issues of the foundations of the deen in order to beautify Iman with certainty (yaqeen) until it becomes the very source of eye witnessing. As for jurisprudence, the Sufi always takes hold of the highest legal opinion by following that which is the best and most perfect interpretation. This is in accordance with His words: "Those who hear the word and follow the best interpretation."

It is for this reason that the madh'hab of the Sufis
in doctrines of beliefs has been the madh'hab of the early ancestors regarding the doctrine of incomparability (of Allah) and the negation of resemblance (to Allah) without commenting on how ness or interpolation. Their madh'hab with regard to legal decisions is the madh'hab of the partial jurist, who only take from the madh'habs that which is confirmed by the prophetic traditions. This is in order to combine the light of imitation with the light of guidance, while at the same time adhering to a single madh'hab without opposing the rest in the most sound and well-known opinion except when necessary. Their madh'hab in the issues of the superogatory acts of worship is the madh'hab of the people of prophetic traditions. For they do take that which has been falsely attributed to the Prophet, like the prayer for the week and the like. This is in spite of the fact that Abu Taalib affirmed this sought of worship during the rituals of pilgrimage and he was followed in this by Imam al-Ghazaali.

The Sufis distinguished themselves in their madh'hab of moral training through the principle of gathering their hearts to their Master by whatever way they are able. This is regardless if it is based upon what is clearly permissible, concessions or on that in which opinions differ.

They have also made statements that have been rejected by those who do not understand their objectives. The rejecters demanded for a return to what the Sufis themselves have demanded, regarding correct worship in accordance with what is the safest and choosing preference for the most authentic.

Imam al-Junayd, may Allah be pleased with him indicated that foundation by his words: "Everything which gathers the slave to his Lord is permissible. " Al-Qushayri said on the authority of Abu Ali `d-Daqaaq, may Allah be pleased with him on the authority of the shaykhs, that they said: "What gathers your heart to Allah, then there is no problem with it."

Success is with Allah

Excerpt from a text by Shehu Uthman Dan Fodio called Usul u Wilaya (The foundation of sainthood. On Clarifying the Path of Tasawwuf and On What It Is Constructed

Point 13:

Clarification of the judgment regarding frequenting worldly people, tyrants and others, in order to bring benefit to the Muslims and avert harm from them.

I say, and success is by Allah, that frequenting worldly people, as has been mentioned, is not allowed.

Ibn al-Hajj said in al-Madkhal, “One should be very cautious about frequenting any of those thought to be worldly people, even if they do not outwardly appear to be so, because people should come to the door of the scholar. He should not go to their doors. He has no need to do that either to avert something he is afraid of or in the hope that it will be a means of taking care of other people’s needs by bringing benefit and averting harm from them. This is because:

• Firstly, it is feared as an immediate consequence that those whom he frequents will control him.
• Secondly, he is doing something definitely forbidden for the sake of something theoretical which may or may not take place.
  

Indeed, the real way to seek help in fulfilling one’s own needs and the needs of the Muslims is to cut oneself off from the doors of these people and to rely on Allah and return to Him.”

The Gnostic of Allah, ‘Abdu’l-Wahhab ash-Sha’rani said in Lawaqi’ al-Anwar that Sufyan ath-Thawri said,

“Beware, my brother, of being in the proximity of princes and mixing with them for any reason. For instance you may be asked to intercede and defend someone who has been wronged and to avert injustice from him. That comes from the trickery of Iblis. He uses that enticement as a means to draw the scholars near them and he uses this world as a trap.”

‘Abdu’l-‘Aziz al-Andalusi said, “If you say that there are weak and wronged people in the clutches of injustice, and therefore that resorting to kings and being familiar with the leaders of people with the intention of interceding for those in need of it, is a great act of worship, going by the Prophet’s words, ‘Intercede and you will be rewarded or Allah will decide on the tongue of his Prophet as He likes,’ we say that this is one of the basic tricks of Shaytan. Frequenting tyrants is tantamount to destruction because of the abasement implicit in that for those who support the Shari’a. The supporters of the Shari’a are the true nobles of islam in every region. This is because sitting with those people in order to become friendly is for the supporters of the Shari’a one of the greatest acts of rebellion, hypocrisy and fighting Allah and His Messenger."

I say, however, that this does not preclude interceding for those who are wronged when something which makes doing this necessary happens and it is within your power to do so, the deen is safe, and there is no harm. More than one of the ‘ulama’ have stated this.

-end-

Intro and Summary

Point 12:

Clarification of the judgment on dealing with the property of wrongdoers.

This matter falls into various categories. Ibn Juzayy al-Kalbi said that their property falls into two categories. One is that which is haram in itself, such as stolen goods and the like. It is not lawful to sell it or buy it if it is goods, nor to eat it if it is food, nor to wear it if it is clothes, nor to accept it as a gift, nor to take it as payment for a debt. Whoever does any of these things is someone who takes illegal possession (ghasib).

The second category is haram to deal with. This occurs in three cases:

• When somone’s property is mostly haram. Dealing with it wich is disliked according to Ibn al-Qasim, and forbidden according to Asbagh.
• The one who has nothing but haram property. If he has no halal property at all, it is haram to deal with him.
• The one who has halal property but has also acquired some haram property which increases his property and which is mixed with the halal property.
• There is disagreement as to whether it is permitted or forbidden to deal with him, and there is a distinction between dealing with him by selling him goods, which is permitted and receiving gifts and their like, which is not permitted.

This is enough to achieve the answer to this point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it! Show us the false as false and make us avoid it!

Point 11:

Clarification of the definition of the halal and haram and the doubtful regarding booty.

I say, and success is by Allah, that the root of the halal is not unkown.

Ahmad az-Zarruq said in Miftah as-Sidad, the commentary on Irshad as-Salik, “The halal is what is free from anhy claims of being the right of Allah or the right of His slaves. It is that whose source is clearly known. The haram is what is verified to be the property of someone else as al-Ghazzali said in Miftah al-‘Abidin. The doubtful is that which is not specified to be halal or haram, as Ahmad az-Zarruq said in his book, Miftah as-Sidad, the commentary on the Irshad as-Salik.”

This is enough to achieve the answer to this point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it! Show us the false as false and make us avoid it!

Point 10:

On buying slaves brought from the lands in which Islam has spread.

I say, and success is by Allah, that countries fall into three types:

• Those in which it is confirmed that the people are not Muslim.
• Those in which it is confirmed that its people are Muslim.
• Those where we do not know whether to judge them as part of the Land of Islam or the Land of Disbelief because we have no knowledge of them.

It is permitted to buy and own those brought from the first category by general agreement and consensus, Ahmad Baba said in the kitaab al-kashf wa’l-Bayan li-asnaf majlub as-Sudan, “There is absolutely no harm in owning them.” It is not permitted to buy and own those brought from the second category unless it is verified that the person was a born unbeliever. This is the fatwa given by the scholars of Andalusia like Ibn ‘Attab and others. This was followed by the judges of Fes as Ahmad Baba said in the kitab al-kashf. As for those brought from the third category, the faqih and hafiz Makhluf al-Balbali said,

“Whoever is concerned for his own safety should only buy from someone whose land is known so that it is evident whether he is from the land of Islam or the Land of Disbelief.”

The faqih and hafiz Abu Ishaq ibn Hall said that refraining from owning those brought from areas about which it is not known whether they are part of the Land of Islam or the Land of Disbelief is part of scrupulousness.

This is enough to achieve the answer to this point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make follow it! Show us the false as false and make us avoid it!

Intro and Summary

Point 9:

Clarification of the judgment regarding repelling an enemy who suddenly attack a city.

I say, and success is by Allah, that if the enemy suddenly attack a people’s city, it is obligatory for everyone there, even women and slaves, to repel them. It is also obligatory for everyone who is near them to help them if that is possible.

In the Risala it says, “You should not go raiding without your parent’s permission unless the enemy attacks a people’s city and invades it. In that case, it is obligatory for everyone to repel them and you do not have to ask your parents’ permission.”

Shaykh al-Khalil said in al-Mukhtasar, “When the enemy suddenly attacks, fighting becomes an obligation for everyone, even for women.”

In Fawakih ad-Dawani, the commentary on the Risala, we find,

“The commentator on the Mukhtasar said that it is also obligatory for slaves and
those who are near to them, even if they lack the physical strength to do so.
The upshot is that, in that instance, jihad is obligatory for everyone who is
able, even women and slaves. It is a duty for every individual. It is forbidden
to flee if the total strength of the people of the city is half that of the
unbelievers, and the total of the unbelievers does not reach twelve thousand.
Otherwise it is permitted to flee.”

Abu’l-Hasan al-Maliki said in Tahqiq al-Mabani, “It is obligatory for their neighbors to help them, even if they are not among those neighbors who made undertakings to do so.
Thus it is obligatory for all those near them to undertake that. It is an individual obligation for all Muslims.”

This is enough to achieve the answer to this point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it! Show us the false as false and make us avoid it!

Point 8:

Clarification of the judgment regarding attacking brigands (muharibun) and those Muslims who live with them voluntarily, and the difference between fighting them and fighting rebels.

I say, and success is by Allah, that it is obligatory for the Amir al-Mu’minin, if there is one, to attack brigands and those Muslims who live with them voluntarily. If there is no amir, it is obligatory for the whole community of Muslims, if the situation demands it and it is feasible. Ibn Juzayy said in the Qawanin, “To fight them is jihad. If they are killed, their blood can be shed with impunity. Whoever is killed by them is a martyr.”

Shaykh al-Khalil said in al-Mukhtasir, “A brigand is a highway robber who blocks the roads and takes the property of Muslims or anyone else in a situation in which it is impossible to seek help.”

Ash-Shabrakhiti said in his commentary on the Mukhtasir, “This means that the brigand is any highwayman on the roads or anyone who stops people in order to take their property even if he does not actually block the road. It also applies to anyone who enters a house or alley and fights to take property or robs the drunk or deceives children or anyone else to take what they have.”

Al-Kharashi said in his commentary as-Saghir about this, “It is taking the property of a Muslim or anyone else. With the expression ‘or’ Khalil extends the active participle of the highwayman. So he defines the one who takes property in the above manner as being a brigand (muharib), even if he does not block the road, and this is how things are.”

Muhammad ibn ‘Abdu’l-Karim said in the Ajwiba in response to the questions of the Askia:

“Brigands must be attacked. There is nothing held against you if any Muslims who are among them are killed because they have wronged themselves by staying with them. You incur no blame for whatever harm is done to their status and that property has been destroyed. If you become aware of that before the property is ruined, it should not be ruined but rather returned to its owner. That is in the case of a Muslim who lives with them voluntarily but does not raid with them. As for the one who lives with them voluntarily, raids with them and helps them in corruption, he possesses and do not accept any repentance from him if Allah gives you power over him.”

Abu’l-Qasim al-Burzuli said in his book, “The sultan was victorious over a group of men from the deserts of North Africa, most of whom had made money illicitly. Ibn ‘Arafa gave a fatwa that their property was permissible as booty based on the circumstances of the majority of them until it could be ascertained who among them had gained his property lawfully.”

He said, “This is because they were all rebels in that they increased the number of brigands and increased their strength.” So he did not grant them the same inviolability as someone who had kept himself apart and not mixed with them. This is when they have some alternative. Otherwise it is like the case of someone who is forced to be in the abode of War since he is unable to leave and fears for himself, his property and children.

As for the difference between fighting brigands and fighting rebels, Ibn al-Hajj said in al-Madkhal, “Fighting rebels is different from fighting idol worshippers in thirteen ways:

• Rebels are to be fought with the aim of deterring them and not intentionally killing them.
• They are fought when advancing but left when retreating.
• Those of them who are wounded should not be finished off.
• Captives from among them are not to be killed.
• Their women are not to be taken captive.
• Their children are not to be taken captive.
• Their property is not taken as booty.
• No truce can be concluded with them allowing them to stay in their land.
• No peace can be made with them allowing them to continue with their innovation for a sum of money.
• Help cannot be sought from an idol worshipper in fighting them.
• Artillery is not to be used against them.
• Their housed are not to burned.
• Their trees are not cut down.

“Fighting brigands is like fighting a band of rebels in all aspects except for five differences:

• They may be fought while advancing and while retreating.
• It is permitted to intend to kill them in war.
• It is permitted to imprison those of them who are captured.
• They are liable for any blood they spill or property they destroy in the war when that war comes to an end, while that is not the case with a rebel group.
• Whatever kharaj-tax or sadaqa they have collected is considered to have been taken by force, so whatever they have taken must be paid back.”

This is enough to achieve the answer to the point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it! Show us the false as false and make us avoid it!

Intro and Summary

Point 7:

Clarification of the judgment regarding jihad against unbelievers and the difference between jihad against them and jihad against apostates.

I say, and success is by Allah, that jihad against the unbelievers is a collective obligation (fard kifaya). It is specifically incumbent on the Amir al-Mu’minin, and on the whole community of Muslims if there is no amir as we find al-Fawakih ad-Dawani. It says in the Mukhtasar that jihad should be fought on the most pressing front every year, even if one fears brigands. It is a collective obligation (fard kifaya), like visiting the Ka’ba, even if it is done under an unjust ruler. That applies to every responsible, capable male.

As for the difference between jihad against the unbelievers and jihad against apostates, al-Maghili Muhammad al-Hajj,

“There are three sorts of unbelievers. The first are those who are unmistakably
born unbelievers like Jews, Christians, Magians and others who have inherited
outright unbelief from their fathers. The second are those who were Muslims and
then apostatized openly from the deen of Islam and accepted another
religion of disbelief. The third are those who claim to be Muslims but
whom we judge to be unbelievers because they have committed outward actions
which only an unbeliever could commit.”

There is no disagreement among scholars that the children and wives of born unbelievers can be taken captive and their property divided. There is disagreement about those who are unbelievers through apostasy. Ibn al-Qasim said about a group of Muslims in a fortress who had apostatized from the deen of Islam to disbelief, “Their children and wives should not be taken captive, but their property is booty for the Muslims.” Ibn Rushd said that this was the correct position because the apostates were originally free. He said that the majority of scholars and Imams of former times followed the position of Ibn al-Qasim regarding apostates.

As you know, anyone who does any action which make him automatically an unbeliever is asked to repent. If he repents, he is left alone. If he does not repent, he is killed with the sword for disbelief but his children are not enslaved. These children are compelled to accept Islam. Their umm walads whom they have made pregnant are part of the property of the Bayt al-Mal. I see no harm in that. Even so, these children are not enslaved. As for any property which is found, which was looted from Muslims, its proper owner can take it when he finds it without any question because they looted it from him claiming to be Muslims. What they have looted is not the same as what the born unbeliever has looted.

The Madkhal contains judgments regarding the apostates and states that the land of the apostates is different from the Land of war (Dar al-Harb) in four ways:

(1) No truce can be concluded with apostates permitting them to remain in their land.
(2) No peace can be concluded with them allowing them to remain apostates for a sum of money.
(3) Their children are not enslaved nor are their women taken captives.
(4) Those who capture their property do not own it.

It also differs from the land of Islam in four aspects:

• Apostates can be fought from the front and the rear, just like idol worshippers.
• They can be killed when captured and when they are resisting.
• Their property becomes booty for the Muslims.
• Marriage with them is not valid.

This is enough to achieve the answer to the point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it! Show us the false as false and make us avoid it!

Intro and Summary

Point 6:

Clarification of the judgment regarding the property of unbelievers at a time when they are being consorted with and have security from bloodshed.

In the Sahih of al-Bukhari, it says that al-Mughira kept the company of some people in the Jahiliyya and then killed them and took their property.

Then he became Muslim. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “His Islam is accepted, but none of his property.”

Al-Qastallani said in Irshad as-Sari, the commentary on al-Bukhari, that the words of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, “His Islam is accepted, but none of his property,” means, “I will not have anything to do with it because he took it by treachery.” This is because, although the property of the idol worshippers can be taken by force, it is not lawful to take it in time of security. If a man is another man’s companion, then the life of each of them should be safe from the other. Taking property by treachery from the unbelievers and others is forbidden. Their property is lawful by raiding and combat.

This is enough to achieve the answer to the point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it! Show us the false as false and make us avoid it!

Intro and Summary

Point 5

Clarification of the judgment regarding the property of Muslims who live voluntarily in the land of unbelievers.

I say, and success is by Allah, that the property of Muslims who live voluntarily in the land of disbelief becomes part of the booty of the idol worshippers, even if it is known who they are.

In az-Zaharat al-Wardiyya, it says that al-Ujhuri was asked about a group of Muslims who live under an unbelieving king and are able to flee but do not. Then a Muslim king attacks them and takes booty from them and divides it up as spoils. Some of the Muslims subject to the unbelieving king come and recognize some of their property which has already been allotted. Can they take it or not? He replied that the judgment regarding Muslims who live voluntarily in the land of the unbelievers is the same as the judgment of the property of the harbi who becomes a Muslim and stays in his land. It is booty which becomes part of the Bayt al-Mal. Al-Burzuli said that about some of them. Then he said, “I heard that Asbagh said that is the control of the unbelievers.” Ibn Rushd also took that position.

This is enough to achieve the answer to the point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it! Show us false as false and make us avoid it!

Point 4: Befriending the Kuffar

Clarification of the judgment regarding befriending the unbelievers.

I say, and success is by Allah, that befriending the unbelievers falls into three categories:

One: Friendship which is disbelief by consensus. It is being friends with the unbelievers, joining with them, and loving them because they are unbelievers out of hatred for the deen of Islam and the one who brought it. This friendship is meant by His words, “The believers should not take the unbelievers as friends rather than the believers. Whoever does that has nothing to do with Allah.” (3:28) He also says, “Give the hypocrites the good news that they will have a painful punishment, those who take the unbelievers as friends.” He says, “Whoever of you takes them as friends is one of them.”(5:51)

Two: Friendship which is rebellion, but not disbelief by consensus. It is maintaining ties to the unbelievers so as to obtain the wealth they possess. This friendship is what is being referred to when Allah says, “O you who believe, do not take as friends a people with whom Allah is angry” , meaning the Jews. The commentators say that it was revealed about a group of poor Muslims who used to make friends with the Jews in order to obtain some of their wealth. It is clear that simple friendship with the unbelievers and having ties to them in order to obtain some of the property they possess is not disbelief, but rebellion.

Abu Yahya Zakariyya al-Ansari said in the Fath al-Ansari that the words of
Allah, “Whoever of you takes them as friends is one of them,” (5:51) indicate
that love of the Prophet of the Book is disbelief. However, this is not the
case. I say that he said that as an exaggeration to encourage avoidance of
opponents of the deen or because the ayat was revealed about the hypocrites who are unbelievers.

Three: Friendship which is permitted. It is making friends with the unbelievers and befriending them with the tongue, not in the heart, because of fear of them. This is the friendship meant by Allah’s words, “If you have fear of them.” (3:28) Al-Baydawi said in his commentary on this ayat,

“This forbids taking the unbelievers as friends outwardly and inwardly at
all times, except in a time of fear. Displaying friendship at that time is
permitted.”

To explain the meaning of Allah’s words, Jalalu’din as-Suyuti said in the Takmila that this ayat means that if you fear them, you can befriend them with the tongue but not the heart. This was before Islam was strong and still applies to a land where Islam is not strong.

In the commentary on the Risala, the Fawakih ad-Dawani, an-Nafrawi says concerning the words of the author that the believer must ask for forgiveness for his parents if they are believers and must befriend the believers, “To befriend them and to avoid what creates aversion such as malice and envy. We seek refuge with Allah. What is meant here by befriending them does not mean mere physical contact with them without sincere love in the heart.”

Know that the submissiveness, which is known as humility, is of three kinds:

1. Obligatory: like humility to Allah and His Messenger, and to rulers, scholars and parents.
2. Forbidden: like humility towards the unjust and unbelievers because humility shown to these people is humiliation without honor and a baseness from which one cannot be raised up.
3. Recommended: like humility towards the slaves of Allah other than those mentioned.

What is recognized by the believers is that the unbelievers should not be befriended in the above sense because Allah says, ‘You will not find people who believe in Allah and the Last Day loving those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, even though they be their fathers, their sons, their brothers or their kin.’ (58:22)

Rather they should think badly of them and fight them if they are people of the abode of war (harbiyyun). But if they are dhimmis they should be interfered with except in case of necessity since it is forbidden to harm a dhimmi.

This is enough to achieve the answer to the point in question.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it!
Show us the false as false and make us avoid it!

Intro and Summary

Point 3: Hijrah from Dar al-Kufr to Dar al-Islam

Clarification of the judgment regarding emigration from the Land of Disbelief to the Land of Islam, from the Land of Innovation to the Land of the Sunna, and from the Land of Rebellion to the Land of Obedience.

I say, and success is by Allah, that emigration from the land of disbelief, innovation and rebellion is obligatory by consensus. There is no further clarification needed than the words of Allah, “And those whom the angels take while they are wronging themselves, the angels will say, ‘What were your circumstances?’ They will say, ‘Was not Allah’s earth wide that you might have emigrated in it?’ Those, their refuge will be Jahannum, an evil homecoming! – except for the men, women and children who are abased.” (4:97-98)

Al-Badawi said, “This ayat contains proof of the obligation to emigrate from a place where a man cannot establish his deen.” Jalalu’d-din as-Suyuti said in the Takmila that “they are wronging themselves” by residing with the unbelievers and not emigrating. Ahmad ibn Sa’id said in The Summary of the Ikmal al-Akmal by al-Ubbi, “There is no disagreement that it is obligatory for the Muslims to depose their Imam if he is corrupted by disbelief and also when he ceases to establish the prayer and have it called or any other command of the Shari’a. They must actively oppose the unbelievers if they imagine that they will be able to do so. If they are certain they will not be able to do so, it is not obligatory for them to oppose them and then the Muslim must emigrate from his land to another.”

In the Shu’ab al-Iman, Mu’awiya said that the Messenger of Allah, May Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “Emigration will not cease until the sun rises in the West.” Abu Dawud mentioned midst of the idolworshippers if obligatory for every fearful – he must emigrate from it to the wide spaces of Allah’s earth.

Al-Jazuli said in his commentary on the Risala, “If a man fears for himself, his deen and his property, he must flee to a place where he does not fear for any of these things. It is the same if he is in a land where he sees objectionable (munkar) things – bloodshed, theft of property and the haram – he must emigrate to a place where these things were happening were the best of places – such as Makka or Madina.”

Ibn ‘Abdu’s-Salaam said that emigration is just as obligatory at the end of time as it was at the beginning. Muhammad ibn Juzayy said in the Qawanin al-Ahkam ash-Shari’iyya wa Masa’il al-Furu’ al-Fiqhiya, “Flight is leaving the abode of disbelief for the abode of the Sunna and leaving the land in which the haram dominates and flight from injury to body, family and property.”

Al-Qurtubi said in the Tadhkira, “If civil unrest prevails, all is destroyed. That is when of rebellion appear and the objectionable spreads and there is no change. Then it is obligatory for the believers who object to that with their hearts to emigrate from that land and flee from it. The same judgment applied to the communities before us, as in the case of the people of the Sabbath who left the rebels behind and said, ‘We will not live with you.’ This is also what the right-acting people of the first generations of Islam said.

Ibn Wahb related that Malik said, ‘Leave any land in which the objectionable is done openly.’ Then Abu ‘Amr said that Ash-hab ibn ‘Abdu’l-‘Aziz said that Malik said, ‘One must not reside in a land where the truth is flaunted and where the early Muslims are cursed.’ Abu ‘Amr said, ‘What Malik means is if another land exists where people usually act according to the truth.’”

An-Nafrawi said in his Fawakih ad-Dawani, which is a commentary on the Risala, “The author did not clarify the judgment regarding the harbiyyun (people of the abode of war) who become Muslim, and whether they are allowed to remain in the Abode of War or whether they should emigrate from it to the land of Islam. Someone else made that clear when he said, ‘If people who are unbelievers become Muslim and they are subject to the laws of the unbelievers, then they must depart from there. If they do not leave, then they rebel against Allah and His Messenger. However, their Islam is sound because emigration was only necessary for the soundness of a person’s Islam before the conquest of Makka.’” It is said that emigration was obligatory before the conquest of Makka due to the fear that the unbelievers would corrupt the deen of those who had become Muslims.

You should know the laws of the Shari’a and its judgments and fight the unbelievers. In the Sahih of al-Bukhari, ‘Ata’ ibn Rabah said, “I visited ‘A’isha with ‘Ubayd ibn ‘Umayr al-Laythi and asked her about emigration. She said, ‘There is no emigration today. The believers used to flee with their deen to Allah and His Messenger fearing that they would become corrupted. Today Allah has made Islam dominant and the believer worships his Lord as he likes. But jiad remains obligatory.’”Al-Qastallani said in al-Irshad, commenting on this hadith, “Yes, as long as there is an Abode of Disbelief (Dar al-Kufr) in this world, emigration from it is obligatory for whoever becomes Muslim and fears for his deen or that he will not learn the laws of the Shari’a there. The judgment applies wherever the proper circumstances exist.”

Al-Mawardi said, “When the deen can be victorious in any of the lands of disbelief, thus making it become the land of islam, residing there is better than travelling from it since it is hoped that other people will become Muslim.”

This is enough to provide clarification of the third point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it! Show us the false as false and make us avoid it!

Intro and Summary

Point 2: Muslims are not permitted to remain leaderless.

Clarification of the fact that the Muslims are not permitted to remain leaderless without giving allegiance to an amir.

I say, and success is by Allah, that it is an obligation for every Muslim to give allegiance to the Amir of the believers, if he exists. Muhammad ibn ‘Abdu’l-Karim al-Maghili said in the Answers he gave to the questions of the Askia that it is not halal for a group of Muslims to remain leaderless. Allah said, “Hold fast to the rope of Allah, all together, and do not split up.”
In the Sahih of Muslim, Ibn ‘Umar said that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “Whoever withholds obedience will have no excuse when he meets Allah on the Day of Rising. Whoever dies without having given allegiance dies the death of the Days of Ignorance.”

This is enough to provide clarification of the second point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it. Show us the false as false and make us avoid it.

Intro and Summary

Point 1: Deen is based on making things clear...

Clarification of the fact that the deen is based on making things clear. Anyone who follows his own opinion does not follow the Prophet who brought the Shari’a.

I say, and success is by Allah, that it should be known that clear perception is an obligation for the Muslim. Ahmad az-Zarruq said in his ‘Amad al Murid as-Sadiq, after quoting the words of Allah, “Say: this is my way. I call to Allah from insight, I and whoever follows me”:

“It is clear that making things clear is one of the bases of the deen and that whoever acts from his own opinion is not following the one who brought the Shari’a. However, there are three types of people. People of knowledge who are excellent at finding out what is correct in questions which require proof, even if they are not mujtahids.

1. People of knowledge who are excellent at finding out what is correct in questions which require proof, even if they are not mujtahids.

2. Those who are between ordinary people and people of knowledge. It is only correct for them to follow someone who has a clear grasp of the matter in hand. Their limited knowledge of the Shari’a obliges them to follow that person’s example. However, they may not take anything from the one they are following if it is in contradiction to what they already know of the rules of the Shari’a. No one is permitted to follow someone else’s knowledge if it is contrary to the rules of the Shari’a. However you cannot decide this unless you really have clear knowledge of it.

3. Ordinary people. They should hold to what they have no doubt about. Otherwise they are making a mockery of their deen and playing with it. This must be clearly understood!

This is enough to provide clarification of the first point.

O Allah! Show us the true as true and make us follow it. Show us the false as false and make us avoid it.


Intro and Summary

Important Points

In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate

May Allah bless our master, Muhammad, and his family and Companions and grant them peace.

So speaks the poor slave in need of the mercy of his Lord, ‘Uthman ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Uthman ibn Salih, known as Ibn Fudi. May Allah cover him with His mercy – Amen!

Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds, and may the best of blessings and most complete peace be upon our master Muhammad and all his family and Companions. May Allah be pleased with the Followers, the practicing ‘ulama’ and the four Imams of ijtihad and those who follow them until the Day of Requital.

To proceed, these are important points which must be acknowledged by the people of the Sudan and all those brothers who live in all the regions and lands of the earth similar to the Sudan.

Point 1: Clarification of the fact that the deen is based on making things clear. Anyone who follows his own opinion does not follow the Prophet who brought the Shari’a.

Point 2: Clarification of the fact that the Muslims are not permitted to remain leaderless without giving allegiance to an amir.

Point 3: Clarification of the judgment regarding emigration from the Land of disbelief to the Land of Islam, from the Land of innovation to the Land of the Sunna, and from the Land of rebellion to the Land of obedience.

Point 4: Clarification of the judgment regarding befriending unbelievers.

Point 5: Clarification of the judgment regarding the property of Muslims who live voluntarily in the land of unbelievers.

Point 6: Clarification of the judgment regarding the property of unbelievers at a time when they are being consorted with and have security from bloodshed.

Point 7: Clarification of the judgment regarding jihad against unbelievers and the difference between jihad against them and jihad against apostates.

Point 8: Clarification of the judgment regarding attacking brigands (muharibun) and those Muslims who live with them voluntarily, and the difference between fighting them and fighting rebels.

Point 9: Clarification of the judgment regarding repelling an enemy who suddenly attack a city.

Point 10: On buying slaves brought from lands in which Islam has spread.

Point 11: Clarification of the definition of the halal and the haram and the doubtful regarding booty.


Point 12: Clarification of the judgment on dealing with the property of wrongdoers.


Point 13: Clarification of the judgment regarding frequenting worldly people, tyrants and others in order to bring benefit to the Muslims and avert harm from them.

Here ends the book, al-Masa’il al-Muhimma, completed between Dhuhr and ‘Asr, this Thursday, 20^th Rajab, 1217 AH by the praise of Allah and His good help. O Allah, give us success in doing what You have made obligatory and avoiding what You have made forbidden and following the sunna of your Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Amen, O Lord of the Worlds.

Kitab al-Masa’il al-Muhimma (Book of Important Points)
By Shaykh ‘Uthman dan Fodio