Ukitazama Kitabu na Sunnah, utaona kwamba Uislamu umeamua masuala haya muhimu kwa uwazi, na pia umeamua hatua za lazima kuhusu hayo kuwa ni suala la uhai au kifo. Uislamu, kwa mfano, umeona kuritadi kutoka katika Uislamu, iwe ni kwa mtu mmoja au kikundi, kuwa ni suala muhimu, na umefanya hatua inayochukuliwa dhidi yake kuwa ni ya uhai au kifo; yaani, mkosaji atubu au auawe. Hivyo, Uislamu umeamua suala hilo pamoja na hatua yake. Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisema: "Yeyote atakayebadilisha dini yake, auawe." Pia imepokewa kwa wasia wa Ibn Mas'ud, aliyesema: Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisema: "Damu ya Muislamu anayekiri kwamba hakuna mungu isipokuwa Allah na kwamba mimi ni Mtume wa Allah, haihalalishwi kumwagwa isipokuwa katika visa vitatu: mzinzi, muuaji wa mtu mwingine, na mwasi anayeiacha jamii." Suala hili kwa Waislamu lilikuwa ni dhana kuu na ukweli ambao walishikamana nao kwa uthabiti.

If one were to review the Book and the Sunnah, one would find that Islam has determined these vital issues in an explicit manner and that it has also determined the compulsory measures towards them as being a matter of life and death. Islam has for instance considered apostasy from Islam, be it by an individual or a group, as a vital issue and has made the measure undertaken towards it one of life and death, that is either the guilty would repent or face death. Hence, Islam has determined the issue and also the measure. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “He who changes his Deen must be killed.” It is also reported on the authority of ibn Masud who said: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: The blood of a Muslim person who professes that there is no god but Allah and that I am the messenger of Allah is not violable except in three instances: the adulterer, the slayer of another person and the apostate who abandons the group.” This issue was to the Muslim a dominant concept and a fact which they firmly adhered to.

Waislamu walikuwa wakitekeleza hukumu hii, na kwa mujibu wake waliwaua mwasi aliyekataa kutubu. Maswahaba walifanya hivi huko Yemen wakati wa uhai wa Mtume ﷺ; pia walifanya hivi baada yake ﷺ, na waliowafuata nao walifanya vivyo hivyo. Katika Hadith ya Abu Musa, imepokewa kwamba Mtume ﷺ alimwambia:

The Muslims used to implement it, and accordingly they would kill the apostate who refused to repent. The Sahaba did this in Yemen in the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (saw); they also did this after him (saw) and those who succeeded them did the same. In the Hadith of Abu Moussa, it is reported that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said to him:

Nenda Yemen! Kisha (saw) akamtuma Muath bin Jabal amjie. Alipofika kwake, Abu Musa alimtupia mto na kumwambia: Shuka. Muath alipokaribia kushuka, aliona mtu mmoja amefungwa; kwa hiyo akauliza: Huyu ni nani? Abu Musa akajibu: Alikuwa Myahudi, kisha akasilimu, kisha akarudi tena kuwa Myahudi. Hapo Muath akamwambia: Sitaketi hadi auawe. Yeyote anayeacha dini yake lazima auawe. Abu Dawood ameripoti hivi: Mtu aliyeacha Uislamu alipelekwa kwa Abu Musa, akamwalika atubu kwa takriban siku ishirini; kisha Muath alikuja akamwalika atubu lakini alikataa, kwa hiyo akampiga shingo. Al-Darqutni na Al-Bayhaqi wametoa hadithi ifuatayo: Abu Bakr alimwalika mwanamke aitwaye Umm Qarfah atubu, baada ya kusilimu kisha kuacha Uislamu, lakini alikataa kutubu, kwa hiyo akamwua. Pia, kabila nyingi za Kiarabu zilipokataa wajibu wa Zakat, Abu Bakr alichukulia hilo kuwa kuacha Uislamu. Hivyo, alichomoa upanga dhidi yao na kupigana nao hadi akawarudisha katika zizi la Uislamu.

“Go to Yemen!” Then he (saw) sent Mu’ath ibn Jabal to join him. When he reached him Abu Moussa threw him a pillow and said to him: “Get down.” As Mu’ath was about to dismount, he noticed a man who was tied up; so he asked: “What is this.” Abu Moussa replied: “He had been a Jew, he then embraced Islam and then he became a Jew again.” Upon this Mu’ath said to him: “I shall not sit until he is killed. He who revokes his Deen must be killed.” Abu Dawood reported this as follows: “A man who apostatised from Islam was brought to Abu Moussa, so he invited him to repent for twenty nights or so; then Mu’ath came and invited him to repent but he refused so he struck his neck.” Al-Darqutni and Al-Bayhaqi extracted the following: “Abu Bakr invited a woman called Umm Qarfah to repent, having embraced Islam and then apostatised, but she refused to repent, so he killed her.” Also, when many of the Arab tribes rejected the obligation of Zakat, Abu Bakr considered this to be apostasy from Islam. Thus, he brandished the sword against them and fought them until he brought them back to the fold of Islam.

Imepokewa katika Al-Fatah kupitia kwa Abdullah bin Sharik, kutoka kwa baba yake, aliyesema: Ilisemwa kwa Ali: Kuna watu hapa mlangoni mwa msikiti wanaodai kuwa wewe ndiye Mungu wao. Basi aliwaita na kuwaambia: Ole wenu! Mnasema nini? Wakasema:

It is reported in Al-Fatah on the authority of Abdullah ibn Sharik on that of his father who said: “It was said to Ali: There are people here at the door of the mosque who claim that you are their god. So he summoned them and said to them: “Woe to you! What are you saying?” They said:

Wewe ndiye Mungu wetu, Muumba wetu na Mruzuku wetu. Akasema: Ole wenu, mimi ni mja tu kama nyinyi. Nakula kama mnavyokula, na ninakunywa kama mnavyokunywa. Kama ningemtii Allah, Yeye angenilipa ikiwa atapenda, na kama ningemwasi, nilihofia kwamba Yeye ataniadhibu. Basi mcheni Allah na tubuni. Lakini bado walikataa kutubu. Siku iliyofuata, walipelekwa kwake, na Qanbar akaja akasema: Kwa Allah, wamerudi kusema lile lile. Ndipo Ali akasema: Waingizeni. Wakasema tena lile lile. Siku ya tatu Ali aliwaambia: Mkisema tena lile lile, nitawaua kwa njia mbaya zaidi iwezekanavyo. Bado walikataa. Basi aliamuru shimo lichimbwe kwa ajili yao kati ya mlango wa msikiti na jumba la kifalme; kisha akaamuru kuni zitupwe shimoni na kuwashwa moto. Akawaambia: Nitawatupa humo msipotubu. Bado walikataa, basi akawatupa humo. Ibn Abbas aliposikia kuhusu kuchomwa kwao, alionyesha kutokubaliana kwake na kuchomwa huko, na akasema kwamba walipaswa kuuawa. Ikrima alisimulia: Kundi la waasi wa dini walipelekwa kwa Amiri wa waumini, Ali, naye akawachoma moto. Ibn Abbas alisikia hili na kusema: Kama mimi ningekuwa yeye, nisingewachoma moto kwa sababu Mtume wa Allah ﷺ

“You are our god, our creator and our provider.” He said: “Woe to you, I am but a servant like you. I eat just like you do and I drink just like you do. If I obeyed Allah He would reward me if He wished, and if I disobeyed Him I feared that He would punish me.” So fear Allah and repent. They still refused to repent. On the following day, they were brought to him and Qanbar came and said: “By Allah they went back to saying the same thing.” So Ali said: “Let them in.” So they again said the same thing. On the third day Ali said to them: “If you were to say the same thing again I shall kill you in the worst possible way.” They still refused. So Ali ordered for a hole to be dug for them between the entrance of the mosque and the palace; then he ordered for wood to be thrown in the hole and lit up. He then said to them: “I shall throw you in if you do not repent.” They still refused, so he threw them in.” When ibn Abbas heard of their burning, he expressed his disagreement over their burning and said that they should have been killed. Akrama reported: A group of apostates were brought to the Amir of the believers, Ali so he burnt them. Ibn Abbas heard of this and said: If I had been him, I would not have burnt them because the Messenger of Allah (saw)

Amekataza hili kwa kusema: "Msiwaadhibu kwa adhabu ya Allah." Ningewaua kwa sababu Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ

has prohibited this by saying: “Do not punish with the punishment of Allah.” I would have killed them because the Messenger of Allah (saw)

Yeyote anayebadilisha dini yake lazima auawe. Katika siku za Al-Mahdi idadi ya wasioamini Mungu na waasi wa dini iliongezeka; naye alikuwa akiwaalika kutubu, na yeyote aliyekataa aliuawa. Al-Mahdi aliwaua idadi kubwa miongoni mwao.

said: “He who changes his Deen must be killed.” In the days of Al- Mahdi the number of atheists and apostates increased; and he used to invite them to repent, and he who refused used to be killed. Al-Mahdi killed a considerable number from them.

Hivyo basi, Waislamu, miongoni mwao Masahaba, wale waliowafuata na Makhalifa, walikuwa wakiwaua waasi wa dini. Walikuwa imara katika jambo hilo bila uvivu wowote. Hata hivyo, Makhalifa walipodhoofika na uelewa wa Uislamu nao ukadhoofika, uvivu katika kuwaua waasi wa dini ulitokea, mpaka ukafiri na uasi wa dini ukaenea. Jambo hili lilifikia hatua ambapo baadhi ya waasi wa dini waliunda makundi na kukumbatia dini geni kwa Uislamu; matokeo yake, hofu iliingia mioyoni mwa Waislamu, ingawa hili lilikuwa jambo la msingi kwa upande mmoja, na jambo ambalo upatanishi na msamaha havikuwa na nafasi kwa upande mwingine.

Hence, the Muslims, among them the Sahaba, those who succeeded them and the Khulafa’ used to kill the apostates. They were firm in the matter without any slackness. However, when the Khulafa’ became weak and the understanding of Islam also weakened, slackness in the killing of the apostates occurred, until atheism and apostasy spread. This reached the point where some of the apostates established groups and adopted a Deen alien to Islam; as a consequence, the fear crept into the hearts of the Muslims, despite the fact that this was a vital issue on the one hand and a matter in which intercession and forgiveness were out of the question on the other hand.

Kwa hiyo, haikushangaza kwa mtu kama Mustafa Kemal kutangaza vita dhidi ya Uislamu, yaani kuritadi dhidi ya Uislamu, pasipo kuwepo yeyote wa kutekeleza hukumu ya Shariah juu yake, kwa kuwa suala la uritadi halikuwa tena likichukuliwa kuwa suala muhimu, na hivi ndivyo ilivyotokea. Kwa hiyo, ni lazima kulirudisha suala hili mahali pake stahiki na kulichukulia kuwa suala muhimu, kwa kuwaua kila mwenye kuritadi, hata kama wangekuwa mamilioni.

Hence, it was not surprising for a man like Mustafa Kemal to declare war against Islam, i.e. apostasise against Islam with no one to execute the rule of Shari’ah upon him, since the issue of apostasy was no longer deemed a vital issue, and this is what happened. Therefore, it is imperative to put back this issue in its rightful place and consider it to be a vital issue, by killing every apostate, even if they numbered millions.

Hata hivyo, hii haimaanishi kwamba tunaweza kuwa wepesi katika kumhukumu mtu kuwa ni mtoka dini (murtadd) kwa sababu tu ana maoni yenye shaka. Ni lazima tuwe na uhakika kamili kabla hatujamhukumu kuwa ni kafiri na mtoka dini.

However, this does not mean that we can be casual in judging a person to be an apostate because he carries a doubtful opinion. We ought to be absolutely certain before we can judge him to be a Kafir and an apostate.

Ikiwa kile anachosema kinamfanya awe mwasi kwa asilimia 99 na hakimfanyi mwasi kwa asilimia 1, basi asilimia 1 ndiyo inapaswa kupewa kipaumbele na yeye achukuliwe kuwa Muislamu, wala asihukumiwe kuwa mwasi. Hii ni kwa sababu Muislamu kwa asili yake ni Muislamu, na hapaswi kuhukumiwa kuwa kafiri au mwasi isipokuwa jambo hilo likiwa limethibitika bila shaka. Vivyo hivyo, hatupaswi kumtetea wala kutafuta visingizio vya kuondoa hukumu ya uasi kutoka kwake ikiwa alithibitika bila shaka kuwa mwasi, kwa sababu hilo lingezuia kipimo cha uhai na kifo kinachopaswa kutekelezwa katika jambo nyeti.

If what he says makes him 99% an apostate and 1% does not make an apostate, then the 1% should take precedence and he should be considered a Muslim, and he should not be judged as an apostate. This is because the Muslim in essence is a Muslim and he should not be judged to be a Kafir or an apostate unless this was conclusive. Likewise, we should not make excuses for him or seek pretexts to remove the rule of apostasy from him if he was conclusively an apostate, because this would impede the measure of life and death to be undertaken in a vital issue.

Hivyo basi, ikiwa Muislamu atafanya jambo linalomtoa katika Uislamu, kama vile kuswali kanisani pamoja na Wakristo na kwa namna wanavyoswali, au akisema jambo linalomtoa katika Uislamu, kama vile: Hadithi ya Ibrahim iliyotajwa katika Qur'ani haikusimuliwa na historia, hivyo ni hadithi ya uongo, au akiamini jambo linalomtoa katika Uislamu, kama vile kuamini kwamba Uislamu hauna uhalali kwa zama hizi, au kuamini kutenganishwa kwa Dini na dola, au akitia shaka katika jambo la wazi la Uislamu, na hivyo kuwa mtoka Uislamu, kama vile kutilia shaka kwamba Qur'ani ni neno la Allah, katika hali zote hizi na katika hali nyingine zinazofanana nazo, atakuwa amekuwa mtoka Uislamu bila shaka. Basi suala hili lazima lichukuliwe kuwa la msingi, hivyo hatua ya uhai na kifo lazima ichukuliwe kuhusiana nalo, nayo ni either toba au kifo.

Hence, if a Muslim was to perpetrate that which renders him an apostate, such as praying in a church with the Christians and in the way they pray, or if he were to utter something that renders him an apostate, such as: “The story of Ibrahim mentioned in the Qur’an was not narrated by history, thus it is a false story”, or if he were to believe in that which renders him an apostate, such as believing that Islam is not valid for this age, or such as believing in the separation of the Deen from the state; or if he were to doubt a conclusive fact of Islam, thus becoming an apostate, such as doubting that the Qur’an is the word of Allah, in all such cases and in other similar cases, he would conclusively become an apostate. Then the issue must be treated as a vital one, thus the measure of life and death must be undertaken towards it, which is either repentance or death.

Vivyo hivyo, Uislamu umeifanya umoja wa Umma wa Kiislamu na umoja wa Dola kuwa miongoni mwa mambo muhimu sana, na umeifanya hatua inayochukuliwa kuelekea huo kuwa kipimo cha uhai na kifo. Hivyo basi, umeweka wazi suala hilo na kipimo chake.

Likewise, Islam has made the unity of the Islamic Ummah and the unity of the State one of the vital issues, and made the measure undertaken towards it a measure of life and death. Thus, it has determined the issue and the measure.

Hili linajidhihirisha katika mambo mawili: jambo la kuwepo kwa makhalifa wengi, na jambo la waasi. Imepokewa kwa mapokezi ya Abdullah bin Amr bin al-Aas kwamba alimsikia Mtume wa Allah ﷺ akisema: Yeyote aliyeapa kiapo cha utii (Bai'ah) kwa Imamu, akampa mkono wake na tunda la moyo wake, basi amtii kadiri awezavyo; na ikiwa mwingine atakuja kugombania naye, basi ipigeni shingo ya mtu huyo. Pia imepokewa kwa mapokezi ya Abu Said Al-Khudri kwamba Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisema: Ikiwa Bai'ah imechukuliwa kwa makhalifa wawili, muueni wa mwisho wao. Hivyo, yeye ﷺ aliufanya umoja wa Dola kuwa jambo la msingi, alipokataza kuwepo kwa makhalifa wengi na akaamuru kuuawa kwa yule anayejaribu kuanzisha wingi katika Ukhalifa, isipokuwa akijirudi. Pia imepokewa kwa mapokezi ya Arfaja aliyesema: Nilimsikia Mtume wa Allah ﷺ akisema: Atakayekujia wakati jambo lenu limeunganishwa chini ya mtu mmoja, akikusudia kuleta mtengano kati yenu au kuvunja kundi lenu, muueni. Hivyo, yeye ﷺ aliufanya suala la umoja wa Ummah na suala la umoja wa Dola kuwa jambo la msingi, alipokataza kugawanyika kwa kundi na akaamuru kuuawa kwa yule anayejaribu kulisababisha, isipokuwa akijirudi.

This is manifested in two cases: one is the issue of the plurality of Khulafa’ and the other is the issue of the rebels. It has been reported on the authority of Abdullah ibn Amr ibn ul-A’as that he heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “He who pledged his Bay’a to an Imam giving him the clasp of his hand and the fruit of his heart shall obey him as long as he can, and if another comes to dispute with him, you must strike the neck of that man.” It has also been reported on the authority of Abu Said Al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “If a Bay’a has been taken for two Khalifahs, kill the latter of them.” Hence, he (saw) made the unity of the State a vital issue when he prohibited the plurality of the Khulafa’ and ordered the killing of the one who attempts to establish a plurality in the Khilafah, unless he retracts. It has also been reported on the authority of Ajrafa who said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: He who comes to you while your affair has been united under one man, intending to drive a wedge between you or fragment your group, kill him.” Hence, he (saw) made the issue of the Ummah’s unity and the issue of the State’s unity a vital issue when he prohibited the fragmentation of the group and ordered the killing of he who attempts to cause it, unless he retracts.

Kuhusu waasi, Allah (SWT) anasema:

As for the rebels, Allah (swt) says:

Ikiwa makundi mawili miongoni mwa Waumini yatagombana, basi fanyeni suluhu baina yao; na ikiwa mmoja wao atamdhulumu mwenzake, basi pigeni vita dhidi ya lile linalodhulumu mpaka lirudi kwenye amri ya Allah. [T.M.Q. Al Hujarat 49: 9] Hii ni kwa sababu uasi dhidi ya yule ambaye Imamu wa Waislamu ameshathibitishwa, yaani yule ambaye ameshathibitishwa kuwa Khalifa wa Waislamu, ni jambo lililoharamishwa, kwa sababu uasi unasababisha mfarakano wa Waislamu, kumwagika damu zao na kupotezwa mali zao. Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisema: Yeyote atakayeasi dhidi ya Umma wangu wakati wao wameungana, mpigeni shingo kwa upanga, awe yeyote. Kwa hiyo, wale wanaoasi dhidi ya Imamu wanachukuliwa kuwa waasi. Wanapaswa kuitwa watubu na shaka zao ziondolewe, lakini wakiendelea kukaidi, wanapaswa kuuawa.

“If two factions from among the believers fall into a quarrel, make peace between them; and if one of them transgresses against the other, then fight the one that transgresses until it complies with the Command of Allah.” [T.M.Q. Al Hujarat 49: 9] This is so because rebellion against him whose Imama of the Muslims has been established, namely the one who has been established as Khaleefah of the Muslims, is forbidden, due to the fact that rebellion leads to the disunity of the Muslims, the shedding of their blood and the squandering of their wealth. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “He who rebels against my Ummah while they are united, strike his neck with the sword whoever he may be.” Hence, those who rebel against the Imam are considered rebels. They should be invited to repent and their doubts should be dissipated, but if they persist, they should be killed.

Kwa kukataza wingi wa dola na uasi dhidi yake, na kwa kukataza mgawanyiko wa Ummah, umoja wa Dola na ule wa Ummah unakuwa jambo la uhai, kwa sababu Mwenye kuweka sheria (swt) ameamuru kwamba hatua itakayochukuliwa dhidi yao ni hatua ya uhai na kifo. Kwa hiyo, yeyote atakayefanya kitendo kama hicho either atubu au auawe. Waislamu walitekeleza hili na walikuwa wakilichukulia kuwa miongoni mwa mambo muhimu zaidi na yenye uzito mkubwa zaidi. Hawakuwahi kuwa wepesi katika hili kwa Muislamu yeyote, awe nani. Ali hakuwahi kuwa mpole kwa Muawiyah, wala Ali, Bani Umayya au Bani Abbas hawakuwa wapole kwa Khawarij, na ushahidi wa ukweli huu ni mwingi usiohesabika. Hata hivyo, Khilafah ilipodhoofika na uelewa wa Uislamu ukapungua, Waislamu walinyamaza kimya kuhusu kujitenga kwa nchi za Kiislamu kutoka katika mwili wa Khilafah. Hivyo, ufa ulichimbwa kati ya Waislamu nao wakasambaratika kuwa dola kadhaa, ingawa kujitenga kwa nchi yoyote kutoka katika mwili wa Dola ni jambo la uhai linalohitaji either warebeli watubu au vita vipiganwe dhidi yao, bila kujali gharama ya maisha au mali.

By prohibiting the plurality of the state and the rebellion against it and by prohibiting the division of the Ummah, the unity of State and that of the Ummah becomes a vital issue, because the Legislator (swt) has decreed that the measure to be undertaken towards them is a measure of life and death. Hence, he who perpetrates such an act should either repent or be killed. The Muslims had implemented this and used to consider it to be amongst the most important and most critical of matters. They never used to be lenient in this towards any Muslim whoever he might have been. Ali was never lenient with Mu’awiyyah, nor were Ali, the Ommayyads or the Abbasids lenient with the Khawarij, and the established facts pertaining to this are innumerable. However, when the Khilafah became weak and the understanding of Islam declined, Muslims kept silent over the breakaway of Islamic lands from the body of the Khilafah. Thus, a wedge was driven between the Muslims and they dissembled into several states, despite the fact that the breakaway of any country from the body of the State is a vital issue that stipulates either the repentance of the rebels or the waging of war against them, regardless of the cost in lives or in wealth.

Hali ilifikia hatua ambapo Waislamu waliishi katika nchi kadhaa, na Khilafah ikawa mojawapo ya nchi hizo. Hali ikazidi kuwa mbaya hadi baadhi ya Waislamu wakaanza kutoa wito wa kuwepo kwa Jumuiya ya Kiislamu, ambapo dola ya Khilafah ingeingia makubaliano na nchi zilizojitenga nayo. Kwa njia hii, dola ya Khilafah ingekubali kujitenga kwao na kugawanyika kwake kuwa nchi kadhaa. Hili lingeunga mkono mgawanyiko wa Waislamu hadi wakageuka kuwa watu na mataifa kadhaa, licha ya ukweli kwamba hili lilikuwa suala la msingi, na licha ya wazi wazi kwa hadithi kuhusu toba au kifo. Kwa hiyo, haikushangaza Mustafa Kemal alipotangaza kuigawa Uturuki kutoka nchi nyingine za Kiislamu, na hata alipotangaza kuridhia kuzikabidhi ardhi za Kiislamu kwa nchi za Kufr ili ziamue hatima yake, kwa sababu suala hilo lilikuwa limeshushwa kutoka kiwango cha suala la msingi. Hivyo, msiba ukatokea, na Waislamu wakawa hawajali kuishi katika nchi kadhaa, na kugawanywa katika watu na mataifa kadhaa. Hii ilikuwa kwa sababu tu suala la umoja wa Ummah na suala la umoja wa nchi hazikuchukuliwa tena kuwa mambo ya msingi, na hatua zilizochukuliwa kuelekea hayo hazikuwa tena hatua za uhai na kifo.

The situation reached the point where Muslims lived in several states and the Khilafah became one of these states. The situation even worsened to the point where some Muslims started to call for an Islamic league, where the Khilafah state would enter into agreements with the states which broke away from her. In this way the Khilafah State would approve of their separation and of it becoming several states. This would support the disunity of the Muslims so that they turn into several peoples and nations, despite the fact that this was a vital issue and despite the explicitness of the ahadith about repentance or death. Hence, it came as no surprise when Mustafa Kemal declared the dismemberment of Turkey from the rest of the Islamic lands, and even when he declared his approval of surrendering the Islamic lands to the Kufr states to decide their fate because the issue was relegated from the level of being a vital issue. So, the calamity took place and the Muslims became indifferent towards having to live in several states, and being divided into several peoples and nations. This was only because the issue of the Ummah’s unity and the issue of the state’s unity were no longer regarded as vital issues and the measure undertaken towards them was no longer a measure of life and death.

Kwa hiyo, ni lazima kulirejesha suala hili mahali pake stahiki na kulichukulia kuwa suala muhimu, ili kuzuia kugawanywa kwa nchi yoyote kutoka katika mwili wa Khilafah, hata kama hilo lingesababisha miaka kadhaa ya mapigano, na hata kama lingesababisha kuuawa kwa mamilioni ya Waislamu.

Hence, it is imperative to restore this issue to its rightful place and to consider it as a vital issue, thus preventing the dismemberment of any country from the body of the Khilafah, even if this led to several years of fighting and even if it led to the killing of millions of Muslims.

Vivyo hivyo, Uislamu umefanya kudhihirisha kufuru ya wazi (Kufr) kuwa miongoni mwa mambo ya msingi kabisa, na umefanya hatua zinazochukuliwa dhidi yake kuwa kipimo cha uhai na kifo. Uislamu umeamua suala hilo na kipimo chake. Muslim ameripoti katika Hadith ya Auf ibn Malik kwamba Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisema: Watakuwepo viongozi watakaowekwa juu yenu, nanyi mtawaona wakifanya mema pamoja na maovu. Yule anayechukia maovu yao hana lawama, yule anayekataa maovu yao pia yuko salama, lakini yule anayeridhia na kuyafuata ameangamia. Ikasemwa: Ee Mtume wa Allah! Je, tusiwapige vita kwa upanga? Akasema: Hapana, mradi wanaendelea kusimamisha Sala miongoni mwenu. Katika riwaya nyingine: Wakasema:

Likewise, Islam has made the displaying of flagrant disbelief (Kufr) one of the vital issues, and made the measure undertaken towards it a measure of life and death. Islam determined the issue and the measure. Muslim reported in the Hadith of Auf ibn Malik that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “Amirs will be appointed over you, and you will find them doing good deeds as well as bad deeds. The one who hates their bad deeds is absolved from blame, the one who disapproves of their bad deeds is also safe, but the one who approves and follows is doomed.” It was said: “O Messenger of Allah! Should we not fight them with the sword?” He said: “No, as long as they continue to establish prayer amongst you.” In another narration : “They said:

Ee Mjumbe wa Allah, je, hatupaswi kupigana nao basi? Yeye ﷺ alijibu:

“O Messenger of Allah, should we not fight them then? He (saw) replied:

Hapana, mradi tu wanaendelea kusimamisha Swala miongoni mwenu. Bukhari ameripoti kwa upokezi wa Ubadah ibn us-Samit aliyesema:

“No, as long as they continue to establish prayer amongst you.” Bukhari reported on the authority of Ubadah ibn us-Samit who said:

Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ alituita, na sisi tukamwapia Bay'a ya kusikiliza na kutii, katika wepesi na ugumu, katika raha na shida, na katika hali mbaya; kwamba hatutagombana na wenye mamlaka, isipokuwa mtu akiona Kufr dhahiri ambayo ana ushahidi wa wazi kutoka kwa Allah. Katika riwaya ya Al-Tabaranii imesema: Kufr iliyo wazi, na katika riwaya ya Ahmad imesema: Mradi tu hawaamrishi ninyi kutenda dhambi kubwa dhahiri. Pia imepokewa kutoka kwa Auf bin Malik Al-Ashjai aliyesema: Viongozi wenu bora ni wale mnaowapenda nao wanawapenda, na ambao wanawaombea nanyi mnawaombea, na viongozi wenu waovu ni wale mnaowachukia nao wanawachukia, mnawalaani nao wanawalaani. Tukasema: Ewe Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ, je, hatutapaswa kuwapinga? Akasema:

“The Messenger of Allah (saw) invited us so we pledged our Baya’a to him to hear and to obey in weal and woe, in ease and in hardship and evil circumstances; that we would not dispute with the people in authority, unless one witnessed a flagrant Kufr of which one had a conclusive proof from Allah.” In Al-Tabarani’s narration it said: “evident Kufr”, and in a narration by Ahmed, it said: “As long as he does not order you to commit a flagrant sin.” It was also reported on the authority of Auf ibn Malik Al-Ashjayi who said: “The best of your Imams are those whom you love and they love you and who pray for you and you pray for them, and the worst of your Imams are those whom you hate and they hate you and you curse them and they curse you.” We asked: O Messenger of Allah shall we not then resist them? He said:

mradi wanaendelea kusimamisha Swala miongoni mwao. Kusimamishwa kwa Swala kunaakisiwa katika kusimamishwa kwa Dini. Pia ni sawa na utawala wa Uislamu na udhihirishaji wa ibada zake. Ukafiri wa wazi ni ukafiri unaodhihirika katika vitendo vinavyofanywa na mtawala, ambao ni utawala wa ukafiri.

“as long as they continue to establish Salah among you.” Establishing Salah is reflected in the establishment of the Deen. It is also tantamount to the rule by Islam and the manifestation of its rites. The flagrant Kufr is the Kufr manifested in the actions performed by the ruler, which is the rule by Kufr.

Kwa hiyo, dhana iliyo nyuma ya Hadithi hizi ni kwamba tunapaswa kupinga watawala iwapo watashindwa kusimamisha utawala wa Uislamu na iwapo watashindwa kulinda ibada zake, na kwamba tunapaswa kupigana nao iwapo watasimamisha utawala wa Ukafiri.

Hence, the concept behind these Ahadith is that we ought to resist the rulers if they fail to establish the rule of Islam and if they fail to uphold its rites, and that we ought to fight them if they establish the rule of Kufr.

Pia kupinga viongozi wenye mamlaka pale tunaposhuhudia Kufr dhahiri.

Also to challenge the people in authority if we witness a flagrant Kufr.

Kuwapinga kunamaanisha kutoa changamoto hiyo hata ikiwa hilo litapelekea kupigana nao. Hili limetajwa katika Al-Fath: Wanazuoni wamekubaliana juu ya wajibu wa kumtii Sultani aliye madarakani na kushiriki Jihadi pamoja naye. Kumtii kwake ni bora kuliko kuasi dhidi yake, kwa kuwa hilo litaokoa maisha na kutuliza wananchi. Hata hivyo, wamelitenga na hili jambo la Sultani kuonyesha wazi Kufr, ambapo katika hali hiyo ni haramu kumtii; bali anapaswa kupigwa vita na wale walio na uwezo, kama ilivyotajwa katika Hadith. Al-Shawkani aliandika katika kitabu chake kiitwacho Nayl-ul-Awtar: Wale wanaoona kwamba ni wajibu kupinga wadhalimu kwa upanga na kupambana nao, wametumia kama ushahidi maandiko ya jumla yaliyomo katika Kitabu na Sunnah. Kwa hiyo, suala la wajibu wa kutawala kwa Uislamu na kuzuia utawala wa Kufr ni suala muhimu sana, kwa sababu Mwenye Kutunga Sheria (swt) ameliweka hatua inayopaswa kuchukuliwa kuhusiana nalo kuwa ni kipimo cha uhai na kifo; hivyo basi, yeyote asiyetawala kwa Uislamu na kutawala kwa mfumo wa Kufr anapaswa either kurejea nyuma au kuuawa.

Challenging them means generating the challenge even if this led to fighting them. It is mentioned in Al- Fatah: “The scholars have agreed upon the obligation of obeying the dominant Sultan and of performing Jihad alongside him. His obedience is better than rebellion against him, for this would spare lives and appease the populace. However, they excluded from this the case where flagrant Kufr is displayed by the Sultan, in which case it would be forbidden to obey him, he should rather be fought by those who are capable, as mentioned in the Hadith.” Al-Shawkani wrote in his book entitled Nayl-ul-Awtar : “Those who hold the opinion that it is obligatory to resist the wrongdoers with the sword and struggle against them, they used as evidence the general texts in the Book and the Sunnah .” Hence, the issue pertaining the obligation of ruling by Islam and preventing the rule by Kufr is a vital issue, because the Legislator (swt) has made the measure that should be undertaken towards it a measure of life and death; thus, he who does not rule by Islam and rules by a Kufr system should either retract or be killed.

Waislamu wameamrishwa wasinyamaze kuhusu utawala kwa kitu kisichokuwa alichokiteremsha Allah (SWT), kwa sababu ni jambo la uhai. Hata hivyo, Taqwa (uchamungu) ilipodhoofika katika nyoyo za Waislamu na ufahamu wao wa Uislamu nao ukadhoofika, ikawa rahisi kwao kunyamaza kuhusu Makhalifa na watawala wao pindi walipotawala kwa Ukafiri katika jambo moja tu; na udhaifu wao ulipozidi, wakaona ni rahisi kunyamaza kuhusu watawala pindi walipotawala kwa Ukafiri katika mambo kadhaa. Matokeo ya muda mrefu ya kunyamaza huku ni kwamba watawala walipata ujasiri wa kutekeleza Ukafiri waziwazi. Waislamu wa Misri walinyamaza pale mtawala alipotekeleza sheria ya kiraia ya Kifaransa na kuondoa hukumu za Sharia. Waislamu walinyamaza katika Dola ya Kiislamu pale kanuni za Ukafiri zilipowekwa kama katiba kwa Waislamu mwaka 1909. Ingawa mwanzoni waliasi dhidi yake, baadaye walinyamaza. Kwa hiyo, haikushangaza Mustafa Kemal alipoiharibu Khilafah na hukumu zote za Uislamu na kutangaza utawala wa Ukafiri. Hili lilitokea kwa sababu Waislamu hawakuliona tena suala hili kuwa la uhai, hivyo janga likatokea, na ikawa rahisi kwa Waislamu kushuhudia Ukafiri wa waziwazi bila kuchomoa upanga kuuondoa; ikawa hata rahisi kwao kutawaliwa kwa Ukafiri bila kuulaani. Zaidi ya hayo, wengi wa Waislamu walikubali hukumu za Ukafiri, wakazizoea na kuziacha hukumu za Uislamu kwa hiari yao. Hali hii ilifikia kiwango ambacho Waislamu walikubali Ukafiri na kuutaka, mbali na kunyamaza juu yake na kutopigana nao. Yote haya yalitokea kwa sababu tu suala la kutawaliwa kwa mfumo wa Ukafiri halikuchukuliwa tena kuwa jambo la uhai, na hatua iliyochukuliwa kuelekea hilo haikuwa tena ya uhai na kifo.

The Muslims are ordered not to keep silent over the rule by other than what Allah (swt) has revealed, because it is a vital issue. However, when Taqwa (piety) weakened in the souls of the Muslims and their understanding of Islam also weakened, it became easy for them to keep silent over the Khulafa’ and the rulers if they ruled by Kufr in one single matter; and when their weakness increased, they found it easy to keep silent over the rulers if they ruled by Kufr in several matters. The long term consequence of this silence was that the rulers had the audacity to implement Kufr in a flagrant manner. The Muslims in Egypt kept silent when the ruler implemented the French civil law and abolished the Shari’ah rules. The Muslims kept silent in the Islamic State when the rules of Kufr were established as a constitution for the Muslims in 1909. Though they revolted against them at first, they remained silent afterwards. Hence, it came as no surprise when Mustafa Kemal destroyed the Khilafah and all the rules of Islam and declared the rule of Kufr. This was so because the Muslims no longer regarded this issue as a vital one, thus the calamity occurred and it became easy for the Muslims to witness the flagrant Kufr without brandishing the sword to remove it; it even became easy for them to be ruled by Kufr without condemning it. Worse still, the majority of Muslims accepted the rules of Kufr, became accustomed to them and relinquished the rules of Islam by choice. This situation reached such a point that Muslims accepted Kufr and called for it, in addition to keeping silent over it and not fighting against it. All this was only because the issue of ruling by a Kufr system was no longer considered to be a vital issue, and the measure undertaken towards it was no longer that of life and death.

Kwa hiyo, ni lazima kulirudisha suala hili mahali pake stahiki na kulichukulia kuwa suala la msingi. Hivyo, utawala wa mfumo wa Kufr utazuiwa hata ikiwa hilo litasababisha miaka kadhaa ya mapigano, hata ikiwa litasababisha kuuawa kwa mamilioni ya Waislamu na kufa shahidi kwa mamilioni ya waumini.

Hence, it is imperative to reinstate this issue in its rightful place and to consider it a vital issue. Thus, the rule by a Kufr system would be prevented even if this led to several years of fighting and even if it led to the killing of millions of Muslims and to the martyrdom of millions of believers.

Kwa hiyo, ufahamu wa mambo yote muhimu ambayo Mwenye Kuweka Sheria (SWT)

Therefore, the perception of all the vital issues which the Legislator (swt)

...ilikuwa imebainishwa na kuamuliwa, na ambayo Yeye alifanya kipimo cha kuchukuliwa dhidi yake kuwa ni kipimo cha uhai na kifo, ilikuwa imedhoofika. Uhusiano wa masuala haya na Aqeedah ya Kiislamu ulikuwa umedhoofika, na yalishushwa kutoka nafasi yake hadi kufikia kiwango ambacho hayakuonekana tena kuwa ni hukumu muhimu sana za Shari'ah ambazo silaha zinapaswa kuchukuliwa kwa ajili yake; hivyo yalishushwa kutoka nafasi ambayo Mwenye kutunga sheria (swt) alikuwa ameiweka, yaani, yalishushwa kutoka nafasi ya jambo la maisha. Matokeo yake, kipimo ambacho Shari'ah ilikuwa imekiamuru kuhusu masuala haya hakikuchukuliwa tena kuwa ni upinzani wa kutumia nguvu ili kuondoa utawala wa Kufr na kurejesha utawala wa Uislamu. Kwa hiyo suala la kuiangamiza Khilafah na kuondoa mfumo wa Uislamu halikuonekana kuwa jambo la maisha, na ukweli kwamba suala hilo ni jambo la maisha haukuwa ndio mtazamo mkuu. Hivyo Mustafa Kemal alisonga mbele na hatua yake, akaiangamiza Khilafah na kuufuta Uislamu kutoka ramani ya kisiasa bila yeyote kuchukua silaha dhidi yake na kupigana naye. Kwa hiyo, makafiri kuiangamiza Khilafah na kuondoa mfumo wa Uislamu kutoka kuwepo kwake kulitokea kwa urahisi na wepesi, mbele ya macho ya mamilioni ya Waislamu. Lau Waislamu wangalikuwa wakati huo wanajua kwamba suala hili ni jambo la maisha, ambalo hatima ya Waislamu na hatima ya Uislamu inategemea, na kwamba hatua muhimu kuelekea humo ilikuwa ni kuchukua silaha na kupigana na Mustafa Kemal, Waislamu wasingepigwa pigo hili la kusikitisha. Basi, kushindwa kwa Waislamu kutambua kwamba suala hili lilikuwa jambo la maisha lililohitaji kipimo cha uhai na kifo ndio sababu ya msiba uliowapata.

had outlined and determined and for which He made the measure to be undertaken towards them one of life and death, had weakened. The linkage of these issues to the Islamic Aqeedah had weakened, and they were relegated from their position to the point where they were no longer perceived as being very critical Sharia’ah rules, for which arms should be taken up; thus they were relegated from the position in which the Legislator (swt) had placed them, i.e. they were relegated from the position of the vital issue. Consequently, the measure which the Shari’ah had decreed towards them was no longer deemed to be resistance by force to remove the rule of Kufr and restore the rule of Islam. Therefore the issue of destroying the Khilafah and removing the system of Islam was not perceived as a vital issue, and the fact that the issue was a vital one was not dominant consideration. So Mustafa Kemal went ahead with his action, destroyed the Khilafah and wiped out Islam from the political map without anyone taking up arms against him and fighting him. Therefore, the Kuffar's destruction of the Khilafah and their removal of the system of Islam from existence occurred with ease and simplicity, before the eyes of millions of Muslims. Had the Muslims been at the time aware of the fact that this issue was a vital one, upon which the fate of the Muslims and the fate of Islam depended and that the necessary measure towards it was to take up arms and fight Mustafa Kemal, the Muslims would not have been dealt this tragic blow. Hence, the Muslims’ failure to perceive that this issue was a vital issue which necessitated a measure of life and death, was the cause of the calamity that befell them.