Shari'a imeweka wajibu juu ya baadhi ya mambo na kuharamisha baadhi ya mengine.

The Shar’a has obliged some matters and prohibited some others.

Haikuruhusu watu kuzibadilisha, kuzigeuza au kuzipotosha kwa namna yoyote ile. Mwenye hekima Mtunga Sheria amekipa ruhusa (rukhsah).

It did not allow people to alter, change or distort them in any way. The All-Wise Legislator has granted rukhsah (dispensation)

pale ambapo Yeye anajua kwamba zitahitajika. Mahali popote asipotoa ruhusa (rukhsah), hakuwaruhusu watu kukwepa hukmu, hata kama tamaa zao na Mashetani wameifanya kukwepa huko kuwavutia, kwa kisingizio cha manufaa. Yule anayeruhusu kuacha alichowajibisha Allah 􀀬 na kuruhusu kukiuka alichokikataza Allah, nk, bila ruhusa (rukhsah) kutoka kwa Allah 􀀬, huyo ni Kafiri au Fasiki mjinga.

where He knows that they will be needed. Wherever He 􀀬 has not given a rukhsah, He 􀀬 did not allow the people to escape from the hukm, even if their desires and Shayateen made this escape attractive to them, under the title of benefit. The one who permits the abandonment of what Allah 􀀬 has made obligatory and allows the violation of what Allah has prohibited etc, without a rukhsah from Allah 􀀬 is a Kaafir or ignorant Faasiq.

Baadhi ya wanazuoni walihitimisha kwamba maslahah ni dalili ya kuruhusu ugawanaji wa madaraka.

Some deduced that maslahah is a proof to allow power sharing.

Walinukuu ufafanuzi wa maslahah kuwa ni maelezo ya tendo ambalo kutokana nalo hupatikana kila wakati au mara nyingi wema au manufaa, iwe kwa umma au kwa watu binafsi. Wanasema kwamba wanazuoni walichunguza Sharia, na kupitia hilo waliongozwa kwenye maoni kwamba Sharia imewekwa kwa ajili ya maslahi ya waja katika maisha haya na Akhera.

They quoted the definition of maslahah as being the description of the action from which good or benefit is always or mostly acquired, whether for the public or individuals. They say that the ‘ulema examined the Sharee’ah and through this they were guided to the view that the Sharee’ah has been set down for the interests of the servants in this life and the hereafter.

Walitoa mfano wa Masalih Mursalah (maslahi zisizo na ushahidi maalum) na masuala yanayotegemea hilo. Walisema kwamba kugawana madaraka hakuruhusiwi kwa njia ya Masalih Mursalah, kwa sababu matini wazi zimeonyesha kwa uthabiti kwamba yule anayeshiriki katika utawala wa Kijahili ni mwenye dhambi.

They cited the example of Masalih Mursalah (undefined interests) and the issues on which it is based. They said that powersharing is not allowed by way of Masaalih Mursalah, because clear texts have indicated in a decisive way that the one who participates in the Jahili rule is sinful.

Badala yake, istinbati hapa inahusu kuchagua bora zaidi kati ya mambo mawili mazuri, na kutambua ovu zaidi kati ya mambo mawili maovu; kupata maslahi makubwa zaidi kwa kupuuza lile dogo zaidi, na kuepuka madhara makubwa zaidi kwa kukubali lile dogo zaidi.

Rather, the deduction here refers to the preference of the best out of two good things, and recognising which is worse out of two evil things; the acquisition of the greater of two interests by ignoring the lower of them, and avoiding the greater of two harms by accepting the lower of them.

Walisema kwamba njia hii katika Sharia ina sifa zilizo wazi. Hivyo Uislamu umekataza pombe na kamari, hata baada ya kueleza kwamba zina manufaa kwa watu, lakini ni manufaa madogo, yaliyozidiwa na madhara makubwa yaliyomo ndani yake.

They said that this path in the Sharee’ah has clear features. So Islam has forbidden alcohol and gambling, even after stating that there is benefit in them for the people, but it is a small benefit, outweighed by the great harm in them.

Shari'a imeweka wajibu wa kupigana vita licha ya ukweli kwamba waumini wataangamia na kupoteza mali zao, kwa sababu katika vita kuna manufaa makubwa yanayopendwa na Mola Mlezi (SWT) na manufaa makubwa kwa waja.

The Shar’a has obliged fighting despite the fact that believers will perish and lose their wealth, because in the fighting there are great benefits dear to The Lord 􀀬 and great benefits for the servants.

Katika historia ya Kiislamu, watawala na wanazuoni walikuwa wakifuata mbinu hii katika kuendeleza Uislamu. Kwa hiyo, Mtume ﷺ alijizuia kuibomoa Ka'bah na kuijenga upya juu ya misingi ya Ibrahim, licha ya manufaa ya kidini yaliyokuwemo katika kufanya hivyo. Hii ni kwa sababu madhara yatakayotokea yangekuwa makubwa kuliko manufaa ya kuirekebisha muundo wa Ka'bah. Alimwambia mkewe 'Aishah ؓ, ﷺ: "Lau si watu wako, ambao wameacha Jahiliyyah hivi karibuni, ningeibomoa Ka'bah na kuipa milango miwili." [Imepokewa na Tirmidhi na Nasa'i]; na wao wanatoa mifano mingi mingine mbali na hii.

In the Islamic history the rulers and scholars used to adhere to this method in proceeding with Islam. Hence, the Messenger 􀁕 abstained from demolishing the Ka’bah and rebuilding it on the foundations of Ibraheem, despite the religious benefits in doing so. This is because the harm that will be entailed will be greater than the benefit in correcting the structure of the Ka’bah. He 􀁕 said to his wife ‘A’ishah 􀁗; “Had it not been for your people, who had just recently (come out of) Jahiliyyah, I would have demolished the Ka’bah and given it two doors.” [Reported by Tirmidhi and Nasa’i]; and they bring many other examples aside from these.

Kutokana na mtazamo huu, wanasema kwamba hakuna shaka kuwa kushiriki katika serikali ya kijahili kuna madhara makubwa. Serikali hizi zinatekeleza utawala wa Twaghut, zinakengeuka na amri Yake (SWT), na zinagombana na utawala Wake: "Hukumu si ya yoyote isipokuwa Allah." [TMQ 12:40], "Wala Yeye hamshirikishi yeyote katika Hukumu Yake na Utawala Wake." [TMQ 18:26].

From this perspective they say there is no doubt that participating in a jahhili government has immense harms. These governments implement the rule of Taghut and deviate from His 􀀬 order and dispute His rule; “The command (or judgement) is for none but Allah.” [TMQ 12:40], “And He makes none to share in His Decision and Rule.” [TMQ 18:26].

Licha ya haya, wanasema kwamba harakati inaweza kuona kwamba kugawana madaraka kutaleta manufaa makubwa kwa Uislamu, Waislamu na harakati ya Kiislamu, katika baadhi ya hali. Inaweza kupelekea kuondolewa kwa Ṭāghūt na kukubaliwa kwa haki. Hebu tunukuu baadhi ya kauli zao kuhusu jambo hili, ili tuelewe mtazamo wao katika hali yake halisi. Kisha, mbinu yao ya kufikiri na maoni yao yatakapokataliwa, tutaelewa ni kwa kiasi gani wamejitenga na mbinu ya kufikiri ya Shar'ī. Wao wenyewe wanasema yafuatayo.

Despite this, they say the movement may see that power sharing will realise a great benefit for Islam, Muslims and the Islamic movement, in some cases. It may lead to the removal of the Taghut and acknowledgment of the truth. Let us quote some of their statements regarding this, in order to understand their view in its true nature. Then, when their method of thinking and their opinion has been refuted, we will understand the extent to which they have distanced themselves from the Shar’ee method of thinking. They themselves say the following.

- Ushiriki wa Muislamu katika utawala wa kijahili utamweka katika hali kubwa ya mgongano. Muislamu anatakiwa kupigana na dola za Taghut, basi inawezekanaje yeye awe ndiye anayeanzisha utawala wa Taghut? Allah (SWT) ametoa maoni Yake juu ya wale wanaodai kuamini, kisha baada ya hapo wanarejea kwa Taghut kwa ajili ya hukumu; “Je, hukuwaona wale (wanafiki) wanaodai kwamba wanaamini yale yaliyoteremshwa kwako, na yale yaliyoteremshwa kabla yako, nao wanataka kwenda kuhukumiwa (katika mabishano yao) kwa Taghut (mahakimu wa uongo, n.k.), ilhali wameamrishwa kuwakataa. Lakini Shetani anataka kuwapoteza mbali sana.” [TMQ 4:60] - Kuwatii Tawaghiit (wingi wa Taghut) wanaotunga sheria kinyume na amri ya Allah (SWT) ni kuwafanya kuwa miungu badala ya kumfanya Allah kuwa Mola, kama Yeye (SWT) alivyosema kuhusu watu wa Kitabu.

- The Muslim’s participation into a jaahili rule will put him in a big contradictory situation. The Muslim is required to fight the states of Taghut, so how is it possible for him to be the one who establishes the rule of Taghut? Allah 􀀬 has given His view of those who claim to believe, and then after that refer to the Taghut for judgement; “Have you seen those (hypocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taghut (false judges, etc), while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaytan (satan) wishes to lead them far astray.” [TMQ 4:60] - Obeying the Tawagheet (pl. of Taghut) that legislate contrary to the order of Allah 􀀬 means taking them as lords instead of taking Allah as The Lord, as He 􀀬 has said regarding the people of the Book.

"Wamemchukua maulamaa wao na watawa wao kuwa miungu badala ya Mwenyezi Mungu, na (pia wamemchukua kuwa Mola wao) Masihi, mwana wa Maryamu, ilhali waliamrishwa wasimwabudu yeyote isipokuwa Mungu Mmoja (Ilah - Allah)." [TMQ 9:31]. Mjumbe ﷺ alimfafanulia ‘Addi b. Haatim kwamba maana ya kuwachukua kuwa miungu ni kuwatii pale walipohalalisha alichokikataza Mwenyezi Mungu na kuharamisha alichokihalalisha Mwenyezi Mungu.

“They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah, and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam, while they were commanded to worship none but One Ilah (God - Allah).” [TMQ 9:31]. The Messenger 􀁕 explained to ‘Addi b. Haatim that the meaning of taking them as lords is to obey them when they allowed what Allah 􀀬 had forbidden and prohibited what Allah 􀀬 permitted.

Siku hizi tumezoea kuona watawala wakiwatumia Waislamu wacha Mungu wanaowateua kama pambo la kupamba utawala wao mbaya, na kuwadanganya watu wasiojua mambo na umma kwa ujumla. Kwa hiyo watawala husema kwamba kama wangekuwa katika batili, basi fulani asingekubali kugawana madaraka nao.

- Nowadays we are accustomed to see the rulers using the upright Muslims, that they appoint, as an ornament to adorn their ugly rule, and to deceive the simple-minded and the masses. Hence the rulers say that if they were on falsehood, then so and so would not have accepted to share power with them.

- Na kinachozidisha uovu ni kwamba baada ya kupitisha sheria dhalimu na za kiudhalimu kupitia waziri Mwislamu; na sheria hizo zikishatimiza malengo yao maovu, wanamtupa, kama mtu anavyotupa mbegu ya tende.

- What makes things worse is that after they pass unjust and tyrannical laws through the Muslim minister; and the laws have achieved their evil aims, they discard him, in the way one discards a datestone.

- Kushiriki madaraka ni dalili ya kuelekea kwa wale wanaofanya dhulma. Allah 􀀬 ametuonya juu ya hili pale Alipesema: {Wala msielekee kwa wale waliodhulumu, moto usije ukakugusani.} [TMQ 11:113] Zaidi ya hayo, kushiriki madaraka huongeza muda wa utawala wa kijahilia.

- Powersharing is an indication of inclination toward those who commit injustice. Allah 􀀬 has warned us of this when He said; “And incline not toward those who do wrong, lest the Fire should touch you.” [TMQ 11:113] In addition, powersharing prolongs the life of a jaahili rule.

Inatutosha kujua kwamba yule anayeshiriki katika hukumu hii atahesabiwa miongoni mwa wale ambao Allah 􀀬 amesema: "Na wasiohukumu kwa yale aliyoteremsha Allah, basi hao ndio Makafiri." [TMQ 5:44], na: "Na wasiohukumu kwa yale aliyoteremsha Allah, basi hao ndio Madhalimu." [TMQ 5:45]; na: "Na wasiohukumu kwa yale aliyoteremsha Allah, basi hao ndio Mafasiki." [TMQ 5:47] Mambo haya yote hayajafichwa kwa viongozi na wahubiri wa harakati hizi. Maana wazi ya aya hizi na dalili zake hazijafichika hata kidogo kwa yule anayezichunguza.

- It is enough for us to know that the one who participates in this ruling, will be included amongst those about whom Allah 􀀬 said; “And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kaafirun (disbelievers).” [TMQ 5:44], and; “And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the zaalimun (unjust, oppressors).” [TMQ 5:45]; and; “And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Faasiqun (transgressors).” [TMQ 5:47] All of these points are not hidden from the leaders and da’ees of these movements. The clear nature of the ayaat and their indications are not in the least bit hidden from the one who examines them.

Licha ya yote haya ambayo wao wenyewe wameyasema, wanaongeza kwamba harakati inaweza, katika baadhi ya hali, kuona kwamba kugawana madaraka kutaleta manufaa makubwa kwa Uislamu, Waislamu na harakati ya Kiislamu. Inaweza hata kupelekea kuondolewa kwa ṭāghūt na kuimarishwa kwa haki.

Despite all of this that they themselves have said they add that the movement may in some cases take the view that powersharing will realise a great benefit for Islam, Muslims and the Islamic movement. It may even lead to the removal of the taghut and a strengthening of the truth.

Tunaweza kufupisha faida zinazotokana na ugawanaji wa madaraka ndani ya harakati ya Kiislamu kwa vipengele vifuatavyo:

We can summarise the benefits arising from the powersharing of the Islamic movement under the following points:

1 - Kuzuia njama dhidi ya harakati ya Kiislamu kwa kujifahamisha na yale yanayofanyika nyuma ya milango iliyofungwa, na kujitahidi kuzivunja.

1 - To prevent plots against the Islamic movement by familiarising oneself with what takes place behind closed doors, and working to thwart it.

2 - Kuonyesha picha ya kundi ambalo lina uwezo wa kuwaongoza watu, na si tu kundi la madarvishi.

2 - To give an image of the group that it is able to lead the people and not just a group of dervishes.

3 - Kurejesha imani kwa Uislamu, kwa kuwa unaweza kupanga mambo ya umma na mambo ya faragha ya maisha.

3 - To restore confidence in Islam, as being able to organise the public and private affairs of life.

4 - Kuongeza uzoefu wa kundi katika njia za kusimamia utawala.

4 - To increase the experience of the group in the ways of administering the rule.

5 - Ili harakati hiyo ifahamike na utawala uliopo, ili iweze kujilinda dhidi ya uovu wake.

5 - So that the movement becomes familiar with the existing regime so that it can protect itself from its evil.

6 - Kuwafunza na kuwaelimisha makada maalum wa Kiislamu kupitia udhamini unaopangwa na serikali.

6 - To train and educate the special Islamic cadres through the scholarships organised by the government.

7 - Kuunda kundi la watu kutoka katika jamii ya Kiislamu, ambao watakuwa na hadhi ya juu miongoni mwa watu. Hao ndio watakaokuwa wakitatua matatizo mengi ya jamii na wanachama wake.

7 - To produce a collection of individuals from the Islamic group, who will have a high standing amongst people. They will be the people who solve most of the difficulties of the group and its members.

8 - Kuongeza vituo vya Kiislamu na kupambana na vituo vya kufuru.

8 - To increase the Islamic centres and fight the centres of kufr.

9 - Kuwafunza makada wa Kiislamu siasa na jinsi ya kukabiliana na michezo yake.

9 - To train the Islamic cadres in politics and how to repel its games.

1 0- Kufaidika kutokana na sifa ya mamlaka kwa manufaa ya kundi.

1 0- To benefit from the reputation of the authority for the benefit of the group.

11 - Ikiwa kundi hilo lilijiepusha kushiriki, basi wale wengine wanaoshiriki wanaweza kuwa maadui wa Uislamu, wanaotumia juhudi zao zote kushambulia harakati ya Kiislamu na kuangamiza Uislamu na Waislamu.

11 - If the group abstained from participating, then the other ones who participate may be enemies of Islam, who use all their efforts to attack the Islamic movement and to destroy Islam and the Muslims.

Tumeshughulikia mtazamo wao kwa undani kiasi, lakini shughuli yetu ilikuwa ya kukanusha na si ya kunukuu. Hii ni ili tuelewe hali yake halisi kwa uwazi, na ili mtu aone ni kwa kiwango gani wamethubutu kwenda katika kiburi chao dhidi ya dini ya Allah 􀀬, wanapotoa fatwa zinazomkasirisha Muumba wa mbingu na ardhi na kuchochea chukizo miongoni mwa waumini, bila kuheshimu haki ya Allah 􀀬 wala kutii amri Yake. Pia ni ili Muislamu aone ni kwa kiwango gani mtazamo wao unagongana na hukumu za wazi za Shari'ah, ambazo haziwezi kubadilishwa kwa namna yoyote, na aone jinsi wanavyokuwa mbali na kushikamana na mbinu sahihi ya Uislamu katika istinbaat (kutoa hukumu kwa njia ya kuchambua dalili); na ili tuonyeshe uvumbuzi wao wa mbinu mpya - ambayo dalili zake zilijitokeza wakati wa kudhoofika kwa Waislamu na iliathiriwa na mfumo wa fikra wa Magharibi - na ili tufuate mawazo yao kwa undani na tuyakanushe, tufuate njia yao ya kufikiri na tuyapinge.

We have addressed their view in some detail, though our address was in respect of refutation and not quotation. This is in order to understand its true nature in a clear manner, and so that one can see the extent to which they have dared to go in their insolence against the deen of Allah 􀀬, when they issue fatawa that anger the Creator of the heavens and earth and incite revulsion amongst the believers, without respect for the right of Allah 􀀬, or abiding to His order. It was also so that the Muslim can see the extent to which their view clashes with the definite Shar’ee rules, which cannot be tampered with in any way, and see how far away they are from adhering to the correct method of Islam in istinbaat (deduction); and to show their invention of a new method - whose signs appeared during the decline of the Muslims and were influence by the western way of thinking - and so that we can follow their thoughts in detail and refute them, and follow their way of thinking and disprove it.

Moja ya kanuni wazi na za uhakika za Shari'ah - ambazo Ijtihaad haruhusiwi ndani yake - ni kwamba haijuzu kujishughulisha na riba. Allah 􀀬 ameikataza waziwazi pale aliposema: "Allah amehalalisha biashara na ameharamisha riba." [TMQ 2:275]. Haya ni dalili za wazi za Shari'ah ambazo zimeelezwa kwa ufupi katika suala hili, kama pale alipo sema 􀀬: "Allah atauondoa riba na atazidisha sadaqaat." [TMQ 2:276]. Allah 􀀬 pia aliwaonya wanaojishughulisha na riba na akawapa tangazo la vita. Alisema 􀀬:

One of the clear and decisive Shar’ee rules - in which Ijtihaad is not allowed - is that it is not allowed to deal in usury. Allah 􀀬 has clearly forbidden it when he said; “Allah has permitted trading and forbidden Riba (usury).” [TMQ 2:275]. These are definite Shar’ee indications that have been roughly worded in the issue, such as when He 􀀬 said; “Allah will destroy Riba (usury) and will give increase for Sadaqaat.” [TMQ 2:276]. Allah 􀀬 also warned those dealing with usury and gave them of a declaration of war. He 􀀬 said:

"Enyi mlioamini! Mcheni Allah na mwache yale yaliyobaki (yanayowastahiki) ya Riba (riba) (kuanzia sasa), ikiwa ni wenye kuamini kweli. Msipofanya hivyo, basi jueni kuwa ni vita kutoka kwa Allah na Mtume Wake..." [TMQ 2:278-279]. Yeye (SWT) aliwaelezea wale wanaokula riba; "Wale wanaokula riba hawatasimama (Siku ya Kiyama) isipokuwa kama kusimama kwa mtu aliyepigwa na Shetani anayemwongoza kwenye wazimu." [TMQ 2:275]. Mtume wa Allah ﷺ aliihesabu kuwa miongoni mwa madhambi makubwa na kuiunganisha na kumshirikisha Allah, alipose: "Jiepusheni na Mubiqaat (madhambi makubwa) saba." Wakasema:

“O you who believe! Be afraid of Allah and give up what remains (due to you) from Riba (usury) (from now onward), if you are (really) believers. If you do not do it, then take a notice of war from Allah and His Messenger...” [TMQ 2:278-279]. He 􀀬 described those who eat usury; “Those who eat Riba (usury) will not stand (on the Day of Resurrection) except like the standing of a person beaten by Shaytan leading him to insanity.” [TMQ 2:275]. The Rasool of Allah 􀁕 counted it as one of the grave sins and linked it to making Shirk with Allah, when he said; “Stay away from the seven Mubiqaat (grave sins). They said:

"Ni nini, ee Rasuli wa Mwenyezi Mungu?" Akasema: "Kumshirikisha Mwenyezi Mungu, uchawi, kuua nafsi ambayo Mwenyezi Mungu ameiharamisha isipokuwa kwa haki, kula riba, kula mali ya yatima, kukimbia uwanja wa vita, kuwasengenya wanawake waumini, wema na safi."" Licha ya haya yote, tunawaona wakitoka – kwa kufuata mbinu hii – wakisema kwamba kujihusisha na riba ni halali! Imekuwaje katazo lililo wazi na la hakika? Wapi zimeenda onyo na tishio? Kwa mbinu hii wanabadilisha na kugeuza hukumu za Mwenyezi Mungu 􀀬, wanaficha hukumu ya Shari'ah, na wanafanya uzembe katika mambo ya dini kuwa jambo la kawaida na sifa ya Mwislamu.

‘What are they O Rasool of Allah?’ He said: ‘Shirk with Allah, magic, killing a soul Allah has forbidden except by right, eating usury, eating the wealth of the orphan, turning back from the battlefield, defamation of believing, honest, chaste women.’” Despite all this, we see them coming out – in accordance with this method - saying that dealing with usury is allowed! What has happened to the explicit and definite prohibition? Where did the warning and threat go? With this method they are altering and changing the rules of Allah 􀀬, blurring the Shar’ee rule, and they are making negligence in matters of the deen a natural thing and a characteristic of the Muslim.

Vivyo hivyo, kutawala kwa kufuata yale aliyoteremsha Allah 􀀬 ni Fardhi. Kwa kukiri kwao wenyewe, ni wajibu kufanya utawala uwe kwa ajili ya Allah 􀀬 peke yake. Licha ya hayo, kwa kufuata mbinu yao waliyoizua, wameanza kumruhusu Muislamu kushiriki katika utawala wa kikafiri. Angalieni yale tuliyoyanukuu hivi punde ili kuona ni kwa kiasi gani wale wanaojiita viongozi na wanazuoni wa harakati ya Kiislamu wamepotoka mbali na ukweli, ingawa viongozi hawapaswi kuwadanganya watu wao.

Likewise, ruling by what Allah 􀀬 has revealed is Fard. According to their own testimony it is obligatory to make the rule exclusively for Allah 􀀬. Despite this - according to their innovated method - they have started to allow the Muslim to participate in the rule of kufr. Look at what we have just quoted to see how much those who describe themselves as leaders and scholars of the Islamic movement have deviated from the truth, even though the leaders are not supposed to lie to their people.

Wao wenyewe wamesema:

They themselves have said:

Hakuna shaka kwamba kushiriki katika serikali ya kijahili kuna madhara makubwa. Serikali hizi zinatekeleza utawala wa Twaghuti na kuacha amri ya Allah (SWT) na kupinga Hukumu Yake.

- There is no doubt that participating in a jaahili government has immense harms. These governments implement the rule of Taghut and deviate from the order of Allah 􀀬 and oppose His Rule.

Ushiriki wa Muislamu katika utawala wa kijahili utamweka katika mgongano mkubwa. Muislamu anatakiwa kupigana dhidi ya dola za Taghut, sasa inawezekanaje yeye awe ndiye anayeanzisha utawala wa Taghut?

- The Muslim’s participation in a jaahili rule will place him in a big contradiction. The Muslim is required to fight the states of Taghut, so how is it possible for him to be the one who establishes the rule of Taghut?

- Kumtii Taghūt wanaoweka sheria kinyume na amri ya Allah (SWT) ni kuwafanya kuwa miungu badala ya kumfanya Allah (SWT) kuwa Mola.

- Obeying the Taghaweet that legislate contrary to the order of Allah 􀀬 means taking them as lords instead of taking Allah 􀀬 as Lord.

Watawala wa leo huwatumia wale wanaowateua miongoni mwa Waislamu wema kama pambo la kupamba utawala wao mbaya.

- The rulers today, use those whom they appoint from the upright Muslims as an ornament to adorn their ugly rule.

Watawala wa leo wanatekeleza, kupitia kwa waziri wa Kiislamu, sheria zisizo za haki na za kidhalimu.

- The rulers today, they pass through the Muslim minister, unjust and tyrannical laws.

Watawala wa leo, baada ya kufikia malengo yao maovu kupitia kwa waziri wa Kiislamu, wanamtupa kama mbegu ya tende.

- The rulers today, after they achieve from the Muslim minister their wicked aims, they throw him like the date seed.

Katika kugawana madaraka, kuegemea kwa wale wanaodhulumu ni (miongoni mwa mambo yanayokatazwa).

- In power sharing is then inclination toward those who commit injustice.

- Katika kugawana madaraka, maisha ya utawala wa kijahili yanaongezwa muda.

- In power sharing, the life of a jaahili rule is prolonged.

- Yule anayeshiriki katika kutawala atahesabiwa miongoni mwa wale ambao Allah amesema kuwa wao ni; "…al-Kaafirun (makafiri)." [TMQ 5:44].

- The one who participates in ruling will be included amongst those about who Allah said that they are; “…the Kaafirun (disbelievers).” [TMQ 5:44].

“…al-ẓālimūn (wenye dhulma, wanaodhulumu)” [TMQ 5:45].

“…the zaalimun (unjust, oppressors)” [TMQ 5:45].

“…wafasiqu (wanaovuka mipaka).” [TMQ 5:47] Licha ya yote waliyoyataja, wanakuja na maoni kama haya. Ni ujeuri ulioje wanaoonyesha dhidi ya dini ya Allah! Kinachozidisha hali ni kwamba hawavunji tu amri ya Allah, bali pia wanawaalika watu kuvunja amri ya Allah 􀀬. Hili hakika ni dhambi kubwa.

“…the faasiqun (transgressors).” [TMQ 5:47] Despite all that they have mentioned they come with an opinion such as this. What insolence these people show against the deen of Allah! What makes things worse is that they are not only violating the order of Allah, but inviting people to violate the order of Allah 􀀬. This indeed is a great sin.

Baada ya kuwasilisha ukiukwaji wote huu wa Sharia, tunauliza: watapata nini iwapo watashiriki katika utawala wa kikafiri? Tulidhani kwamba baada ya kuwasilisha tahadhari dhidi ya da'wah hii, wangetaja maslahi makubwa ambayo Sharia imeyapuuza, lakini walikuwa werevu wa kutosha kutambua jambo ambalo, kwa mujibu wa mantiki yao iliyokataliwa na fikra zao zisizo na tija, linastahili ukiukwaji huu wa Sharia na kuungwa mkono na maadui wa Allah 􀀬. Fikra zao "za kipekee", ambazo zina jukumu la kutunga sheria katika suala hili, zimewaletea Waislamu matokeo yasiyonufaisha da'wah, wala kuwaleta Waislamu karibu na ukweli au ushindi, wala hayabadilishi hali halisi hata kidogo. Badala yake, matokeo yake huenda yakawa kinyume chake. Hali halisi imekuja kuwa ushahidi wa ukweli huu.

After presenting of all these Shar’ee violations, we ask; what will they achieve if they participate in kufr rule? We thought that after their presentation of the precautions against this da’wah, they would mention enormous interests that have been ignored by the Sharee’ah, but they were clever enough to notice the thing that - according to their rejected logic and unproductive way of thinking - deserve this violation of the Sharee’ah and the support of the enemies of Allah 􀀬. Their “unique” thought, which has the role of legislating in this issue has brought the Muslims results that do not benefit the da’wah, nor do they draw the Muslims closer to the truth, or the victory, and they do not change reality in the least. Rather the yields may be the opposite. The reality has come as a testimony to this fact.

Walitaja makala 11, na wakasema ni manufaa makubwa yaliyopatikana kupitia kushiriki katika utawala wa jaahili. Wallahi! Angalieni haya na tafakarini jinsi yalivyo madogo yakilinganishwa na dhambi kubwa zinazofanywa. Na tuyachunguze baadhi yake na tutoe maoni juu yake.

They named 11 articles, and said they were great benefits realised through participation in jaahili rule. By Allah! Look at these and ponder how trivial they are when compared to the grave sins committed. Let us examine some and comment on them.

Ongezeko la uzoefu wa kundi katika njia za kusimamia utawala.

- Increase in the group’s experience in the ways of administering the rule.

- Kuwafunza makada wa Kiislamu siasa na kuwawezesha kukabiliana na michezo yake.

- Training the Islamic cadres in politics and to repel its games.

- Kufundisha na kuwaelimisha kadhi wa Kiislamu wenye ujuzi maalum kupitia udhamini unaopangwa na serikali.

- Train and educate the specialised Islamic cadres via scholarships organised by the government.

Makala tatu zinazohusu mada moja. Ilikuwa inafaa zaidi zikaandikwa katika makala moja isipokuwa mtu anataka kutoa hoja nyingi za kuunga mkono mtazamo wake. Hii ni licha ya kujua kwamba jambo hilo halihusiani na kiasi cha mtu anachoweza kuzungumza, bali na usahihi halisi wa mtazamo huo.

Three articles that relate to one subject. It was more fitting that they are written in one article unless one wants to cite many supporting arguments for one’s view. This is despite the knowledge that the matter is not related to how much one can talk, but rather the actual correctness of the view.

Je, makala hizi zinathibitisha kwamba Waislamu waasi amri ya Mola wao kwa ajili ya manufaa yanayotarajiwa? Je, hakuna njia nyingine ambayo mtu hapati ghadhabu ya Allah, na ambayo harakati inaweza kuwafundisha Mashabab wake na kuongeza uzoefu wao? Je, mbinu ya Shar'ee haina maandalizi kama hayo? Harakati ya Kiislamu inayoingia katika kazi ya kisiasa kwa njia halali, ikifuata mbinu ya Mtume ﷺ, huongeza uzoefu wao na kuwazoesha uhalisia wa watawala, pamoja na kiwango cha uhusiano wa watawala hao na nchi za kikafiri, michezo na mitindo ya hila. Je, da'ee hawezi kumwita mnywa pombe aache kunywa, isipokuwa da'ee mwenyewe aingie katika baa, anywe pombe mbele ya mnywaji, kisha baadaye aiache, kama njia ya kumshawishi kwamba mnywaji naye anaweza kuiacha? Kwa Allah, akili dhaifu kiasi gani ambazo zimebuni mawazo kama haya! Vipi wanajiruhusu kubadilisha Sheria ya Allah! Pia wametaja makala tatu zifuatazo:

Do these articles warrant that Muslims disobey the order of their Lord for the sake of benefits realised? Is there not another path by which one does not incur the wrath of Allah through which the movement can train its Shabab and increase their experience? Does the Shar’ee method lack such preparation? The Islamic movement that plunges into the political work in a lawful manner, adhering to the methodology of the Messenger 􀁕, increases their experience and familiarity with the reality of the rulers, and the extent of the rulers links with the Kaafir states, games and cunning styles. Is the da’ee not able to call the one who drinks alcohol to leave drinking, except if the da’ee himself enters a pub, drinks alcohol in front of the drinker and then after that leaves it as a method to convince him that the drinker can also leave it? By Allah, how weak are the minds that have come up with such thoughts! How can they allow themselves to change the Law of Allah! They also mentioned the following three articles:

Kuifahamisha harakati ya Kiislamu kwa serikali iliyopo ili kujilinda dhidi ya uovu wake.

- Familiarisation of the Islamic movement with the existing regime to protect itself against its evil.

- Kuzuia njama dhidi ya harakati ya Kiislamu kwa kuijulisha yale yanayofanyika kwa siri, na kujitahidi kuzivunja.

- To repel the plots against the Islamic movement by acquainting it with what takes place in secret, and work to foil it.

- Ikiwa kundi lilijizuia kushiriki, basi mbadala unaweza kuwa kwamba wanaoshiriki ni maadui wanaotumia juhudi zao zote kushambulia harakati ya Kiislamu, au kuangamiza Uislamu na Waislamu.

- If the group abstained from participating, then the alternative may be that the ones who participate are the enemies who use all their efforts to attack the Islamic movement, or to destroy Islam and the Muslims.

Hapa tuna makala tatu zaidi ambazo zote zinahusu mada moja, nayo ni kujilinda na uovu wa tawala na kuzuia njama dhidi ya Uislamu na Waislamu. Tunaweza kuwasilisha ukweli ambao wao wenyewe wanautaja, bila kukubaliana nao, na ili kuwahukumu kwa kanuni zao wenyewe, tunauliza: je, kweli walizuia hatari kwa Ummah na kwa nafsi zao kwa kushiriki katika kutawala kwa yale ambayo Allah 􀀬 hakuyateremsha? Kwa maneno yao wenyewe, wanasema kwamba mtawala humteua Mwislamu kuwa waziri ili kuongeza muda wa utawala, ili apitishe mipango yake na kuboresha taswira yake mbele ya watu.

Here we have another three articles that revolve around one subject, which is to protect oneself from the evil of the regimes and repel the plots against Islam and the Muslims. So we may present the reality that they themselves mention - without agreeing with them - and to judge them by their own principles, we ask; did they really repel the danger from the Ummah and from themselves by participation in ruling by what Allah 􀀬 has not revealed? In their own words, they say that the ruler appoints the Muslim as a minister to prolong the life of the regime, in order to pass its plans and improve its image in front of the people.

Kisha baada ya kufikia lengo lake, itawatema kama kokwa ya tende.

Then after achieving what it wants, it will spit them out like a date stone.

Basi wapi ulinzi dhidi ya uovu na njama? Utawala ambao Waislamu wataingia ndani yake hautaboreshwa taswira yake. Bali taswira yao wenyewe itapotoshwa, na watu watatoa hukumu ile ile kwa utawala huo na kwa wale walioshiriki ndani yake.

So where is the protection from evil and conspiracies? The regime, in which the Muslims enter, would not have its image improved. Rather their own image will be distorted, and the people will pass the same judgement on the regime and those who participated in it.

Walitaja pia makala mbili zifuatazo, ambazo zingeweza kuwekwa vyema katika makala moja.

They also mentioned the following two articles, which would have been better placed in one article:

- Kutoa mfano wa jinsi kundi hilo linavyoweza kuwaongoza watu.

- To give an example of how the group is able to lead the people.

- Kuwapa imani katika Uislamu kwamba una uwezo wa kupanga mambo ya maisha ya kibinafsi na ya kijamii.

- To give the confidence in Islam that it is able to organise the private and public life affairs.

Kikundi hakitaweza kutoa picha kama hiyo. Badala yake, kimetoa mfano mbaya na mwongozo ambao hauwezi kufuatwa. Uhalisia wenyewe ndio ushahidi mkubwa zaidi wa hili. Lau kama zisingekuwepo harakati za Kiislamu zenye ikhlasi na ufahamu zinazopinga miito kama hiyo, na wanazuoni wa Kiislamu wenye kujali kwa dhati, Uislamu ungekuwa umeondoka kwenye nyoyo za watu, kutokana na wale wanaotetea mitazamo hii kwa kuunga mkono tawala. Mbele ya Allah 􀀬 na mbele ya waja Wake, kuna tofauti kubwa mno kati ya harakati au mwanazuoni anayeishi kwa starehe ndani ya tawala, akizungukwa na utukufu wa uongozi wao wa uwongo; akivuta hewa ya kiburi cha majivuno pamoja nao, na harakati au mwanazuoni anayetangaza haki na kuibeba, bila kuogopa lawama ya yeyote; yote hayo kwa ajili ya Allah 􀀬. Hata akiwekwa katika magereza ya mtawala, akikumbuka kauli za Allah 􀀬: “Basi subiri (ewe Muhammad) kama walivyosubiri Mitume wenye azma thabiti.” [TMQ 46:35] “Basi subiri (ewe Muhammad ﷺ) hukumu ya Mola wako, kwani hakika wewe uko chini ya macho Yetu.” [TMQ 52:48] “Basi subiri (ewe Muhammad ﷺ). Hakika ahadi ya Allah ni ya kweli” [TMQ 40:55]. Je, mfano wa hawa wawili ni sawa?

The group will not be able to give such an image. Rather it has given a bad example and a model that cannot be followed. The reality is the greatest evidence of this. Had there not been sincere and aware Islamic movements that opposed such calls, and sincerely-concerned Muslim scholars, Islam would have fallen from the souls of the people, owing to the ones who advocate these views in support of the regimes. In the sight of Allah 􀀬 and the sight of His servants, how great is the difference between the movement or scholar who lives in the comfort of the regimes, surrounded by the glory of their false leadership; breathing the air of boastful arrogance with them, and a movement or scholar who proclaims the truth and undertakes it, fearing the blame of nobody; all for the sake of Allah 􀀬. Even if he was placed in the ruler’s prisons, remembering the sayings of Allah 􀀬; “Therefore, be patient (O Muhammad) as did the Messengers of strong will.” [TMQ 46:35] “So wait patiently (O Muhammad 􀁕) for the Decision of your Lord, for verily, you are under Our Eyes.” [TMQ 52:48] “So be patient (O Muhammad 􀁕). Verily, the Promise of Allah is true” [TMQ 40:55]. Are the example of these two the same?

Walitaja pia makala nne nyingine, ambazo nazo pia zinaweza kufupishwa kuwa makala moja. Walisema:

They also mentioned four other articles, which can also be summarised into one article. They said:

- Kuunda kundi la watu kutoka katika jamii ya Kiislamu watakaokuwa na hadhi kubwa miongoni mwa watu. Hao ndio watakaotatua sehemu kubwa ya matatizo ya jamii na wanachama wake.

- To produce a collection of individuals from the Islamic group who will have a high standing amongst people. They will be the people who solve most of the difficulties of the group and its members.

- Kuongeza vituo vya Kiislamu na kushambulia vituo vya kufr.

- To increase the Islamic centres and attack the centres of kufr.

- Kuwafundisha kadhi za Kiislamu siasa na jinsi ya kuzikabili hila zake.

- To train the Islamic cadres in politics and how to repel its games.

- Kunufaika na sifa ya mamlaka kwa manufaa ya kundi.

- To benefit from the reputation of the authority for the benefit of the group.

Makala kama hizi zinaonyesha jinsi matumaini ya wale wanaotetea mitazamo kama hii yalivyo madogo. Je, matokeo kama hayo yanastahili hatari ya kukosa radhi za Allah 􀀬 na kuitwa Dhalimuun (madhalimu), Faasiquun (wapotovu) na wafuasi wa wadhalimu? Kwa nini harakati isifanye kile inachoweza bila kuingia katika hali hii? Hatukubaliani kwamba harakati itapata matokeo haya ikiwa itamuasi Allah 􀀬 na kushiriki katika utawala wa kijahiliya; badala yake, matokeo yatakuwa kinyume kwa kundi hilo, na pia kwa da'wah na kwa Uislamu kwa ujumla.

Such articles demonstrate the triviality of the hopes of those who advocate such views. Do such results deserve the risk of not gaining the pleasure of Allah 􀀬 and being described as Zaalimoon (unjust), Faasiqoon (transgressors) and supporters of the oppressors? Why doesn’t the movement do what it can without falling into this situation? We do not agree that the movement will achieve these results, if it disobeyed Allah 􀀬 and participated in a jaahili rule, rather the result will be the opposite for the group, and also for the da’wah and Islam generally.

Ikiwa wafuasi wa mtazamo huu wanaweza kutaja makala 11 au sababu 11 zilizowasukuma kuenenda kwa namna hii, basi sisi - kulingana na njia yao ya kufikiri iliyokatazwa - tunaweza kutaja pointi nyingi zaidi zinazounda hatari na vikwazo kwa vitendo kama hivyo. Kwa mfano:

If the advocates of this view can mention 11 articles or reasons that have pushed them to behave in this way then we can - in accordance with their prohibited way of thinking - mention many more points that form risks and obstacles to such actions. For example:

Kwa kufuata mbinu hii, viongozi wa harakati hiyo na vijana wake hujifunza unafiki. Wanapokuwa mbele ya watawala wanaowakubali kushiriki katika utawala, huwaambia yale yatakayowafurahisha. Wanapokuwa peke yao pamoja na watu, husema jambo jingine, na hujaribu kuwashawishi kwamba wanakaribia kwa mtawala na utawala, ili wapate kushika madaraka na kuchukua hatamu kutoka kwa mtawala.

- Following this method, those responsible for the movement and the shabab, learn hypocrisy. When they are in the presence of the rulers who accept them to participate in ruling, they say to them what will please them. When they are alone with the people, they say something else, and they try to convince them that they are drawing closer to the ruler and the rule, so as to seize the rule and take the initiative from ruler.

Mbinu za kundi hilo hupungua nguvu, hujisahau na kuwa laini kupita kiasi, kwa gharama ya mbinu kali na mabadiliko makubwa ya msingi.

- The approaches of the group become diluted, complacent and leniant at the expense of the radical approach and radical change.

- Serikali inaruhusiwa kuhesabu idadi na wafuasi wa harakati hiyo, kufichua mambo yao yaliyofichika na kugundua siri zao. Serikali inaweza kugundua tofauti kati ya wanachama wa kundi hilo, na hivyo itafanya kazi ya kuimarisha na kuchochea tofauti hizo, ili iweze kulidhibiti kundi kwa urahisi, na kulivunja vipande vipande pale inapohitajika.

- The regime is allowed to count the numbers and supporters of the movement and expose their hidden things and find out their secrets. The regime may discover differences between the members of the group, and so it will work to strengthen and encourage these differences, so as to easily control the group, and split it up when the need arises.

Da'wa ya kundi kama hilo itakuwa imewekewa mipaka kwa hukumu zile tu ambazo hazileti hatari kwa utawala, na itanyamaza kimya kuhusu masuala muhimu, hivyo ikitoa picha isiyo sahihi kuhusu da'wa na Uislamu.

- The da’wah of such a group will be limited to the rules that do not represent a danger to the regime, and remain silent over the vital issues, thus giving an incorrect view of the da’wah and Islam.

- Wakati serikali inapompa ruhusa kwa harakati ya Kiislamu inayofanya kazi ndani yake, ili kuanzisha taasisi ambazo kupitia hizo kundi hilo linaweza kutekeleza kazi yake, kundi hilo linakuwa mateka wa taasisi hizo, na litaogopa kwamba serikali huenda ikazitwaa na kuzinyang'anya.

- When the regime grants permission to the Islamic movement that is working within it, to establish institutions through which the group can undertake their work, the group becomes a captive of the institutions, and will fear that the regime may get its hands on them and confiscate them.

Kwa hivyo hawatatoa hukumu yoyote juu ya mambo yatakayoiudhi serikali, na kwa sababu hiyo hawafikirii kujitenga nayo.

So they will not pass any judgement on things that will upset the regime, and consequently they do not think of breaking away from it.

- Wakati harakati ya Kiislamu inapokubali kushiriki katika mfumo wa kijahili, inatoa uhalali kwa tawala za kidhalimu kuwakandamiza harakati za Kiislamu zinazofanya kazi kwa mabadiliko kulingana na mwenendo wa Mtume ﷺ, kwa kuwachukulia wale wanaofanya kazi dhidi ya utawala kuwa ni wenye msimamo mkali na washupavu. Wale wanaoshirikiana na utawala, kwa upande mwingine, wanachukuliwa kuwa wastani na wenye mwanga. Ni jambo la ajabu, na wanaounga mkono mbinu hizi laini wameandika tafiti ambamo wameonyesha kwamba, kwa sababu ya mbinu yao, ndio wastani ambao tawala zinaweza kushirikiana nao, huku wengine wakiwa washupavu.

- When the Islamic movement accepts to participate in a jaahili system, it gives justification to the regimes to clamp down on the Islamic movements that are working for change according to the method of the Messenger 􀁕, by considering those working against the regime as fundamentalists and zealots. Those cooperating with the regime, on the other hand are considered moderate and enlightened. It is a strange matter, and the advocates of these leniant approaches have written studies in which they have indicated that, due to their methodology, they are the moderates with whom the regimes can cooperate whilst the others are zealots.

- Dhana za makundi hayo ya Kiislamu zimebadilika, ili ziendane na hali zilizopo. Kwa mfano, kutokuchukua Jizyah kutoka kwa Dhimmi wasiokuwa Waislamu, au kutowaita watu wa Dhimmah ili wasichochee chuki yao. Zaidi ya hayo, kuna mtazamo wao kwamba Demokrasia ni bidhaa yao wenyewe iliyorudishwa kwao, au kuhalalisha kufanya biashara ya riba. Kushiriki katika utawala kwa kutumia kisicho kile ambacho Allah 􀀬 ameteremsha ni mfano mwingine wenyewe.

- The concepts of such Islamic groups have changed, so as to suit the existing circumstances. For example, not taking Jizyah from the non- Muslim Dhimmis, or not calling them people of Dhimmah so as not to incite their resentment. In addition their view that Democracy is their own commodity that has been returned back to them, or the permissibility of dealing in usury. Participating in ruling with other than what Allah 􀀬 has revealed is another example itself.

Inaongeza muda wa utawala huo kuendelea kuwepo.

- It prolongs the life of the regime.

Inatoa picha nzuri ya utawala huo.

- It gives a beautiful image of the regime.

Uislamu hutoweka katika akili za watu pale wanapoona kwamba Uislamu haujawapa chochote kupitia tawala hizi, hasa baada ya wale wanaotetea mitazamo kama hiyo kuwaahidi al-mann wa salwa (mana na kware), yaani utajiri wa aina zote. Hili linaonyesha kwamba wao hawawezi kutatua matatizo yao kwa njia sahihi. Kwa hiyo harakati hii haiwezi kujiweka mbele kama mfano wa kuigwa, bali inatoa mfano mbaya.

- Islam vanishes from the people’s minds when they see that Islam has not given them anything through these regimes, especially after the advocates of such views promised them with al-mann wa salwa (manna and quails), meaning all sorts of riches. It shows that they are unable to solve their problems in the correct manner. Hence, the movement cannot put itself forward as an example to be emulated, rather it gives a bad example.

Vijana wa da'wah wanapoharibika pale ambapo jambo lao kuu katika da'wah linakuwa ni kutetea desturi za kundi lao, na kama si hivyo, desturi za tawala na kuhalalisha matendo yao.

- Its shabab become corrupted when their sole concern in da’wah becomes defending the practises of their group, if not the practices of the regimes and justification of their actions.

Harakati hiyo hunyamaza kimya kuhusu hatua za mtawala za kuwakandamiza na kuwakamata wabebaji wengine wa da'wah, au hata kuwashambulia, ili kuwafurahisha watawala au kwa kutekeleza ombi lao, kama ilivyotokea hivi karibuni nchini Misri.

- The movement turns silent regarding the ruler’s clamping down and arrest of the other da’wah carriers, or even attacks them, in order to please the rulers or in accordance with their request, as happened in Egypt recently.

- Mbinu hii inafanya manufaa kuwa kigezo cha matendo ya kundi, badala ya kufuata kanuni ya Sharia. Kitendo chochote kinacholeta manufaa kitafanywa, hata kama kinapingana waziwazi na Sharia. Manufaa katika mtazamo wa Mwislamu yanakuwa ya thamani zaidi kuliko Sharia. Kwa hiyo, kuna sababu nyingine nyingi zinazosababisha uharibifu wa dini na da'wah.

- This approach makes benefit the criterion for the actions of the group, instead of the adherence to the Shar’ee rule. Whatever action produces a benefit will be undertaken, even if it clearly contradicts the Shar’a. The benefit in the view of the Muslim becomes dearer than the Shar’a. So, there are many other reasons, which cause destruction to the deen and the da’wah.

Tumeshughulikia haya yote kupitia uhalisia na si kupitia dalili za Kishari'a, ili tuweze kuwaambia: mtazamo wao, hata kwa mujibu wa madhehebu yao, hauzai chochote isipokuwa matunda maovu kwa Uislamu na da'wah. Ni mtazamo usio na tija ambao Shari'a haukubali.

We have addressed all of this through the reality and not the Shar’ee evidences, so that we can say to them, their way of thinking, even according to their school of thought, does not bring anything but evil fruits for Islam and the da’wah. It is an unproductive way of thinking of which the Shar’a does not approve.

Haiyo desturi yetu, kwa mujibu wa tuliyojifunza kutoka kwenye Shari'a, kueleza upotovu wa wazo kutokana na uhalisia, wala kukataa hukumu ya Kishari'a kwa hoja za akili. Tulianza mjadala kwa kufuata mbinu yao, ili tuwakosoe kwa yale yaliyotoka vinywani mwao wenyewe, na kuyakanusha yale waliyoyasema kwa kutumia vigezo vyao wenyewe.

It is not our practice, according to what we have learned from the Shar’a, to explain the corruption of an idea from the reality, or to reject a Shar’ee rule rationally. We began the discussion according to their methodology, so as to criticise them with what came from their own mouths, and disprove what they have said, by using their own criteria.

Hata hivyo, tunajua, na ndivyo wanavyojua pia wafanyakazi wote wa Kiislamu walio macho na wenye nia safi, kwamba kitu pekee kinachoamua kukubaliwa au kukataliwa kwa kauli au kitendo ni Shari'a. Kwa kuwa hali ni hii, dalili za Kishari'a walizozitaja - na wanasema wanazijua na kwamba hazijafichika kwa wengine - peke yake zinachukuliwa kuwa za kutosha kuvunja hoja ya maoni yao na ufahamu wao, hata kama wangekuwa na mifano zaidi ya kutoa. Suala si kuhusu mifano zaidi, bali ni kuhusu namna ya kufikiri.

However, we know, and so do all the aware and sincere Muslim workers, that the only factor in the acceptance or rejection of a statement or action is the Shar’a. Since this is the case, the Shar’ee evidences they have mentioned - and they say they know them and that they are not hidden from others - are alone considered sufficient to refute their opinion and understanding, even if they had more examples to cite. The issue is not to do with more examples, but about the way of thinking.

Hatutasikiliza wanaposema kwamba wanajua hilo. Hakuna haja ya kuwakumbusha juu yake. Licha ya kuwa na elimu ya dalili hizi za Shari'ah, hawakuzichukua kwa sababu walizozitaja. Hili haliruhusiwi; zaidi ya hayo, ni kiburi dhidi ya dini na kupuuza kanuni zake za wazi na sahihi. Kuhusu nukuu zao kutoka kwa baadhi ya wanazuoni wanazozitumia kuunga mkono mtazamo wao: mbali na ukweli kwamba ni mifano isiyolingana na uhalisia wa kile wanachokiita, kauli za watu si dalili ya Shari'ah. Kinachohesabika ni dalili na usahihi wa istidlaal (ustanbati). Wakisema 'fulani mwanazuoni alisema', tunawaambia kwamba Allah 􀀬 na Mtume wake 􀁕 wamesema jambo lililo sahihi, la hakika na Muhkam (wazi na lisilofutwa). Je, inaruhusiwa kwetu kufuta kauli ya Allah 􀀬 na Mtume wake 􀁕 kwa kauli za mtu yeyote tu? Fikra ya manufaa ilitawala wafuasi wa mwelekeo huu kiasi kwamba ingekuwa sahihi kuwaita 'wafanyabiashara wa da'wah'. Lakini mfanyabiashara hufanya biashara ili apate faida, si ili apate hasara.

We will not listen to them saying that they know it. There is no need to remind them of it. Despite having knowledge of these Shar’ee evidences, they did not take them owing to the reasons they mentioned. This is not allowed; besides, it is insolence against the deen and neglect of its definite and correct rules. As for their quotations from some scholars that they use to support their idea; beside the fact that they are examples that do not apply to the reality of what they call for, the statements of men are not a Shar’ee proof. What counts is the evidence and correctness of the istidlaal (deduction). If they say ‘so and so scholar said’, we say to them that Allah 􀀬 and His Messenger 􀁕 have said something that is correct, definite and Muhkam (clear and unabrogated). Is it allowed for us to abrogate the saying of Allah 􀀬 and His Messenger 􀁕 with the statements of just any individual? The idea of benefit dominated the advocates of this approach to the extent that it would be correct to call them, ‘traders in the da’wah’. However, the trader does business in order to make a profit, not to make a loss.

Ufisadi wa fikra zao unaonekana kwa upande mwingine, yaani pale wanapotegemea Qiyas isiyo halali, ambayo inategemea hoja ya maandiko ya Shari'a kwa mantiki, kwa kuweka upendeleo kwa maslahi. Hili linawapelekea kutoa istinbaat (istidlali) mpya, ambayo haikujulikana na Ummah wa Kiislamu wala wanazuoni wake kabla yao. Wameacha njia sahihi ya istinbaat (istidlali) aliyoionyesha Mtume ﷺ, na ambayo ilifuatwa na Ulamaa wote wa Ummah kuanzia Salaf as-Saalih (watangulizi wema) na wote waliowafuata kwa ihsaan (wema).

The corruption of their thinking appears from another angle, that is when they rely on the unlawful Qiyas, which depends on the reasoning of the Shar’ee text, rationally, based on making preference by interest. This leads them to come out with a new istinbaat (deduction), which was not known by the Islamic Ummah or its scholars before. They abandoned the correct method of istinbaat (deduction) shown by the Messenger 􀁕, and followed by all the Ulama’ of the Ummah from the Salaf as-saalih (pious predecessors) and all those who followed them in ihsaan (goodness).

Hakuna athari yoyote ya njia hii iliyodhibitiwa na sahihi ya Shari'ah katika mijadala yao yote. Walifuata mkondo wa Magharibi, katika kulinganisha kwa kutumia akili na kutafuta manufaa. Hadithi ifuatayo inawahusu kikweli: "Atakayeishi miongoni mwenu (kwa muda mrefu) ataona tofauti nyingi."

There is no trace of this regulated, correct Shar’ee method, in any of their discussions. They followed the way of The West, in rational analogy and seeking benefit. The following hadith genuinely applies to them; “The one amongst you who lives (long) will see many differences.

"Jihadharini na mambo mapya, kwani kila jambo jipya ni bid'ah (uzushi), na kila bid'ah itakuwa Motoni." [Imepokewa na at-Tirmidhi na Abu Dawud] Wao husema: Uislamu umekataza pombe na kamari ingawa umeeleza kuwa ni na manufaa kwa watu, ijapokuwa manufaa hayo yanaweza kuwa madogo tu.

Beware of the new matters, for every new thing is a bid’ah (innovation) and every innovation will be in the Fire.” [Reported by at-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud] They say; Islam prohibited alcohol and gambling despite stating that they are of benefit to the people, though it may be only a small benefit.

Hivyo, madhara makubwa yalikuwa mazito zaidi katika pombe na kamari.

Thus, the great harm was weightier in alcohol and gambling.

Shari'a imewalazimisha kupigana vita licha ya hasara katika maisha ya waumini na hasara katika mali yao. Hii ni kwa sababu kupigana vita kuna maslahi makubwa yanayopendwa na Mola Mlezi (Mtukufu na Mwenye enzi ni Yeye) na maslahi makubwa kwa wanadamu.

The Shar’a has obliged fighting despite a loss in the life of believers and a loss in their wealth. This is because fighting has great interests dear to the Lord (blessed and exalted be He) and great interests for mankind.

Mtume ﷺ aliacha jambo la kubomoa Al-Ka'bah na kuijenga upya juu ya msingi wa Ibrahim (as), licha ya maslahi ya kidini yaliyokuwepo katika kufanya hivyo. Hii ni kwa sababu madhara yaliyoweza kutokea yalikuwa makubwa zaidi kuliko maslahi yaliyopatikana kutokana na kurekebisha muundo wa Al-Ka'bah.

The Messenger 􀁕 left the matter of demolishing the Ka’bah and rebuilding it on the foundations of Ibraheem (as), despite the religious interests in doing so. This is because the harm that would be incurred was greater than the interest attained from rectifying the structure of the Ka’bah.

Kulingana na hilo, wanasema kwamba hakuna shaka kwamba kushiriki katika utawala wa kijahili kuna madhara makubwa. Hata hivyo, harakati inaweza kuona kwamba, katika baadhi ya hali, kugawana madaraka kunaleta manufaa makubwa kwa Uislamu, Waislamu na harakati ya Kiislamu. Huenda hata likapelekea kuondolewa kwa Taghut na kuanzishwa kwa haki.

Based on this they say that there is no doubt that participating in a jaahili rule has great harms. However the movement may deem, in some circumstances, that power sharing achieves a great benefit for Islam, the Muslims and the Islamic movement. It may even lead to the removal of the Taghut and the establishment of the truth.

Waliwasilisha wazo lao kwa mtazamo mwingine, jambo linaloonyesha kwamba mtindo wao wa kufikiri umekita mizizi akilini mwao.

They presented their idea from another angle, which indicates that their way of thinking is entrenched in their minds.

Kuelewa maandiko kwa namna hii na kufikia kanuni zinazopingana na Uislamu ni jambo la kuumiza. Tumeona maumivu haya yakiongezeka katika zama za sasa, zama za ushawishi wa utamaduni wa Magharibi, unaotegemea mlinganisho wa riba. Wanazuoni wa mwanzo walikuwa wakifuata kanuni zilizowekwa za Uislamu, zilizopangwa kwa asili yake, ambazo zinategemea kufuata Sheria ya Allah (SWT) katika kila jambo, bila mwanadamu kuingilia kidogo tu katika kutunga sheria, jambo ambalo tutalieleza hivi punde, insha'Allah. Kwa upande mwingine, tunawaona Waislamu, kwa kufuata mbinu hii mpya na ya kubuniwa, wakifungua mlango wa kutunga sheria na wakaingia kupitia mlango huo. Waliruhusu matamanio yao na hisia zao zipime manufaa na madhara yanayohusiana na kitendo chochote walichotaka kukifanya. Kwa mtazamo wa kiakili, manufaa yanapozidi madhara, amri ni kufanya kitendo hicho. Madhara yanapozidi manufaa, wanatakiwa kukiacha kitendo hicho.

Understanding the texts in this manner and coming out with rules that contradict Islam is a painful matter.We have seen the pain increase in the present age, the age of the influence of the western culture, based on the analogy of interest. The early scholars used to follow the regulated principles of Islam imposed by its nature, which is based on the adherence to the Law of Allah 􀀬 in every matter, without the slightest interference of man in legislation, which we shall explain shortly, insha’Allah. On the other hand, we find the Muslims, according to this new and innovated methodology opened a gateway to legislation and they entered through it. They permitted their whims and desires to evaluate the benefits and harms pertaining to any action, which they wished to undertake. From a rational angle, when the benefits outweighed the harms, the order was to do the action. When the harms were outweighed the benefits, then they are required to leave the action.

Kwa mujibu wa njia hii mpya na ya kibunifu, Mwislamu amekuwa mtunga sheria kwa sababu, kwa kufuata matamanio yake na akili yake mwenyewe, anapima maslahi.

According to this new and innovated method the Muslim became a legislator because, based on his whims and his own mind, he evaluated the interest.

Ili kufikia hukumu ya kitendo hicho, walitegemea hoja za kimantiki kupitia maandishi kwa njia iliyotajwa hapo juu. Hii ndiyo njia ile ile inayotumika Magharibi. Magharibi inategemea fikra za aina hii.

In order to reach the rule on the action, they relied upon reasoning the texts in the aforementioned way. This is the same method utilised in The West. The West depends on such a mentality.

Hata hivyo, mbinu hii inafanya maslahi kuwa kitu kinachoabudiwa na Muislamu, badala ya amri ya Allah 􀀬. Hili linadhihirika katika hali ambapo maslahi yanagongana na hukmu ya Shari'a iliyo wazi maana yake; hukmu ya Shari'a inaachwa na kubadilishwa na hukmu inayotegemea maslahi.

However this method makes benefit the thing that is worshipped by the Muslim, not the order of Allah 􀀬. This is made evident in the situation where the interest clashes with the Shar’ee rule that is clear in meaning; the Shar’ee rule is deserted and is replaced by the rule based on benefit.

Matumizi ya maandiko ya Shari'ah yanadhibitiwa na kanuni zilizowekwa. Muislamu anayezifuata anabaki kuwa mja wa Allah (SWT) na mtiifu kwa amri Yake. Hukumu anayoitoa, kwa mujibu wa mbinu sahihi ya kutoa hukumu, ni hukumu ya Allah (SWT). Hilo haliwezekani isipokuwa, katika Qiyas yake, atategemea 'illah (sababu ya kimungu) iliyobainishwa katika Shari'ah.

Use of the Shar’ee texts is regulated by defined principles. The Muslim who follows these remains a servant of Allah 􀀬 and obedient to His command. The rule that he deduces, according to the correct method of deduction, is the rule of Allah 􀀬. That will not be possible unless, in his Qiyas, he depends on the ‘illah (divine reason) stated in the Shar’a.

Kuweka mipaka ya jambo jema na baya, ya tendo linalopendeza na lisilopendeza, na ya halali na haramu, ni haki ya Allah ﷻ pekee. Haki hii haijawahi kupewa mwanadamu. Lau mwanadamu angekuwa na haki hiyo, basi angepewa mamlaka ya kutunga sheria tangu mwanzo, na Shari'ah isingeingilia undani wa hukumu. Muislamu angetakiwa tu kuamini kwamba Allah ﷻ ndiye Muumbaji, bila kulazimika kuamini kwamba Yeye ndiye Mtawala wa mambo yake na Mpangaji wa maisha yake.

Defining the good, and the bad, the attractive action and the unattractive one, and the halaal and haraam, is for Allah 􀀬 only. This has never been given to man. If man had the right, then he would have been given the power of legislation from the beginning. The Sharee’ah would not have interfered in the details of rules. The Muslim would have been required only to believe that Allah 􀀬 is the Creator, without having to believe that He is the Controller of his affairs and Organiser of his life.

Kwa hakika, maelfu ya vitabu vilivyoandikwa katika zama zote za Waislamu vinategemea mbinu ya Shar'a ya istinbaat (kutoa hukumu kwa njia ya kupambanua). Wanazuoni wetu wakuu wa fiqh waliweza kutatua matatizo yao yote kwa kutumia mbinu hii. Ni mbinu ya kivitendo na rahisi kwa yule aliyepewa elimu yake na akajifunga na kanuni zake.

Indeed, thousands of books that have been written throughout the Muslim ages, rely on the Shar’a method of istinbaat (deduction). Our foremost Jurists were able to solve all their problems according to this method. It is a practical and easy method for the one who has been granted its knowledge and has restricted himself to its principles.

Upotovu wa mbinu hii bunifu unadhihirika vya kutosha kwa ukweli kwamba ilizaa kanuni zinazopingana na kanuni wazi za Shari'a. Lau mbinu hii ingekuwa sahihi, kanuni zake zingekubaliana na kanuni za Shari'a. Hili lenyewe linaonyesha kwamba ni mbinu yenye makosa, kama inavyoonyesha pia athari inayoizalisha. Pengine baadhi ya mifano ifuatayo itasaidia kufafanua suala hili.

The corruption of this innovated method is sufficiently illustrated by the fact that it produced rules that are in conflict with the clear rules of the Shar’a. If the method were correct, its rules would have agreed with the rules of the Shar’a. This, in itself, indicates that it is an erroneous method, as does the effect that it creates. Perhaps some of the following examples will help to clarify the issue.

Kubeba da'wah kwa mujibu wa sharia kunahitaji uwazi, ujasiri, nguvu na fikra. Kunahitaji mtu kupinga kila kinachopingana na Uislamu na kukabiliana nacho, ili kubainisha ubatili wake bila kujali matokeo wala hali zilizopo. Kunahitaji mamlaka kamili yawe ya itikadi ya Kiislamu, bila kujali kama inakubaliana au la na wengi wa watu na desturi zao, na iwe wanaikubali, wanaikataa au wanaipinga. Mlinganiaji wa da'wah hawapendezi watu, wala hawapendezi watawala. Hivyo ndivyo alivyokuwa Mtume ﷺ katika da'wah yake, akiamini haki aliyokuwa akiilingania, na akiupinga ulimwengu mzima bila kutilia maanani mila na desturi, imani, dini, watawala wala umma. Hakuelekeza umakini wake kwa kitu chochote isipokuwa Ujumbe wa Uislamu. Ibn Hisham amesimulia kwamba Rasuli wa Allah ﷺ alipowapinga Quraysh, alitaja miungu yao na kuikemea, aliwadhalilisha akili zao na kuwaona mababu zao kuwa wamepotea. Hivyo wakamkataa na kuungana katika upinzani na uadui wao.

- Carrying the da’wah according to the legal manner requires frankness, courage, strength and thought. It requires one to challenge all that contradicts Islam and to confront it, so as to clarify its falseness without any regard for the consequences or the circumstances. It requires that the absolute sovereignty be for the Islamic ideology, irrespective of whether or not it agrees with the majority of the people and their customs, and whether they accept, reject or oppose it. The da’wah carrier does not flatter the people and nor does he flatter those in authority. This is how the Messenger 􀁕 was in his da’wah, believing in the truth to which he was calling, and challenging the whole world without giving any regard for the customs and traditions, beliefs, religions, rulers or masses. He did not give attention to anything except the Message of Islam. Ibn Hisham reported that when the Rasool of Allah 􀁕 challenged the Quraysh, he mentioned their gods and denounced them, and disgraced their minds and considered their forefathers to be misguided. They (as a consequence) rejected him and united in their opposition and hostility.

Huu ndio unapaswa kuwa mwelekeo wa da'wah ya Waislamu leo. Yeyote anayetaka kumfuata Mtume Mtukufu ﷺ ili kutii kauli ya Allah (SWT): "Sema (Ee Muhammad ﷺ): Hii ndiyo njia yangu: ninalingania kwa Allah kwa elimu thabiti, mimi na yeyote anayenifuata." [TMQ 12:108], na kauli ya Mtume ﷺ: "Nimewaachia kitu ambacho, mkikishikilia, hamtapotea kamwe. Jambo lililo wazi: Kitabu cha Allah na Sunnah ya Nabii Wake." [Sira ya Ibn Hisham]; na anayefuata njia ya Salaf as-Salih na kauli yao: "Mwisho wa jambo hili hautaboreshwa isipokuwa kwa kile ambacho mwanzo wake uliboreshwa nacho," lazima ajishughulishe na aina hii ya da'wah.

This is how the da’wah of the Muslims today should be. The one who wishes to emulate the Noble Messenger 􀁕 in order to comply with the saying of Allah 􀀬; “Say (O Muhammad 􀁕 ): This is my way: ‘I invite unto Allah with sure knowledge, I and whosoever follows me.’” [TMQ 12:108], and the saying of the Messenger 􀁕; “I have left amongst you something which, if you hold onto it, you will never go astray. A matter that is clear: the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet.” [Sira of Ibn Hisham]; and who follows the way of the Salaf as-Salih and their saying; “The end of this matter will not be bettered except by that with which its beginning was bettered.”, must engage in this type of da’wah.

Leo, kwa mbinu hii mpya na iliyobuniwa, ambayo Shariah haikubali, tunawaona wale wanaosema: maslahi yenye uzito yanaonyesha kuwa ni afadhali na bora kwamba tuyakaribie mambo kwa hikima, na tuwaalike kwa njia iliyo bora zaidi. Hii ni kulingana na mbinu yao, si mbinu ya Kishari'a. Wao husema: je, kuna faida gani ya da'wah ikiwa tutapinga kila kitu kinachopingana nayo? Kwa kufanya hivyo, je, tutazifungua nyoyo za wengine au tutazifunga? Kwa nini kuonyesha kwamba tulichonacho kinapingana kimsingi na walichonacho wengine? Je, si afadhali kuonyesha kwamba tunashirikiana na wengine katika mambo, ambayo yanaweza kuwa funguo za kuingia katika nyoyo na akili zao, hasa pale mambo yanapoonekana kama kwamba hakuna tofauti kubwa kati yao na sisi? Je, ni kwa maslahi ya da'wah kuwapinga watawala, kufichua njama zao kwa Ummah, na kufichua mipango yao? Kwa kufanya hivyo, tunawachochea na kuvutia uovu wao; au ni afadhali tujaribu kujikurubisha kwao na kuwa marafiki nao? Huenda nao watatukaribia na kutuweka katika nafasi zitakazoifaidisha da'wah, na faida hiyo inaweza hata kuwafikia wote. Huenda kwa njia hii tukaweza kufikia madaraka. Ndiyo maana ni lazima tuwathibitishie kwamba hakuna sababu ya wao kutuogopa, na kwamba hakuna hofu katika kuwaruhusu sisi kujikurubisha kwao. Hapa ndipo safari ya kujipendekeza inapoanzia, pamoja na kauli zilizo mbali na mbinu ya haki. Aidha, hili ndilo mwanzo wa kumridhisha mtawala, na kutoa ushahidi wa uongo kwa vitendo vyake, kunyamazia uongo, kujishughulisha na kuzungumzia mambo madogo yasiyochochea hasira ya mtawala, na kupuuza masuala muhimu ambayo Ummah unapaswa kuonywa juu yake, pamoja na kauli nyingi na vitendo vingine vinavyohatarisha ukweli. Nyuma ya mabadiliko haya yote kuna mabadiliko ya namna ya kufikiri.

Today, according to this new and innovated method, which the Shar’a does not approve of, we find those who say; the preponderant interest indicates that it is more fitting and better that we approach issues with hikmah (wisdom), and we invite with that which is best. This is according to their method, and not the Shar’ee method. They say; what is the benefit of the da’wah if we challenge everything that goes against it? By doing this, will we open the hearts of others or will we close them? Why show that what we have fundamentally contradicts what others have? Is it not more fitting that we show that we are sharing with others in matters, which may act as keys to entering their hearts and minds, especially when the matters appear as if there is not a great difference between them and us? Is it in the interest of the da’wah that you oppose the rulers, expose their conspiracies to the Ummah, and disclose their plans? Thereby inciting them and attracting their evil; or is it better that we try to draw closer to them and befriend them? Perhaps they will draw nearer to us and put us in positions that will benefit the da’wah, and the benefit may even reach everyone. Perhaps we can reach power in this way. That is why we have to confirm to them, that there is no cause for them to fear us, and there is no fear in allowing us to get closer to them. From here begins the journey of flattery, and statements that are far from the method of truth. In addition, this is the start of pleasing the ruler, and giving false testimony for his actions, staying silent over falsehood, preoccupation with and talking about small matters that do not incite the anger of the ruler, and neglecting the vital issues about which the Ummah should be warned, and many other statements and actions that compromise the truth. Behind all of this change is the change in the way of thinking.

Ni pia haki ya Allah (SWT) juu ya mwanazuoni, ambaye amerithi elimu kutoka kwa Mtume ﷺ, kutekeleza haki yake kutoka kwake na kuwa mstari wa mbele miongoni mwa Mujahidina, akisema ukweli, akiushikilia, akiwakabili watawala na kufichua njama zao. Kwa maneno mengine, lazima awe imamu wa elimu, wa mihraabu (sehemu ya kuswalia) na wa vita.

- It is also the right of Allah 􀀬 upon the scholar, who has inherited the knowledge from the Prophet 􀁕, from him to undertake his right and be in the front lines of the Mujaahideen, speaking the truth, holding onto it and confronting the rulers and exposing their plans. In other words, he must be an imaam of knowledge, of mihraab (prayer niche) and of war.

Hii ndiyo waliyokuwa wakiifuata Salaf as-Salih. Kutokana na mbinu hii iliyozuliwa tunaona kwamba imeibuka fahamu iliyozuliwa, ambayo inapingana na yale waliyokuwa wameyazoea wanazuoni wetu wa mwanzo. Fahamu yao inaonekana katika kauli yao kwamba mwanazuoni akisema neno la haki kisha akakamatwa au kuuawa, ni nani atakayechukua nafasi yake? Madhara ambayo Ummah utayapata kutokana na kukamatwa kwake au kuuawa kwake ni mara nyingi zaidi ya manufaa anayoyapata kutokana na hayo. Basi kwa nini tunaiondolea Ummah wema wa mwanazuoni huyu?

This is what the Salaf as-Salih were upon. We can see that from this innovated method, an innovated understanding has arisen, which contradicts with what our early scholars were accustomed to. Their understanding is reflected in their saying that if the scholar spoke the word of truth and then got arrested or killed, who will then take his place? The harm that the Ummah will incur from his arrest or murder is many times more than the benefit he achieves from that. So why do we deprive the Ummah from the goodness of this scholar?

- Vilevile, kuhusu ushiriki katika uchaguzi wa bunge, hili linaruhusiwa lakini kuna masharti: Mgombea awe Mwislamu na anayezingatia kanuni za Uislamu. Asikubali sheria za kufuru, bali aziwekee hoja za kupinga na awasilishe hukumu ya Shari‘ah kama mbadala. Hairuhusiwi kwake kuchagua rais asiye Mwislamu, wala serikali inayotegemea mambo yasiyo ya Kiislamu. Hairuhusiwi kwake kuipa serikali kura ya imani, bali anapaswa kuzuia imani kwake, kwa kuwa serikali hiyo haijaanzishwa kwa msingi wa Uislamu.

- As well, with regards to participation in the parliamentary elections, this is allowed though there are conditions: The candidate should be Muslim and adhering to the rules of Islam. He should not accept the legislation of kufr, rather he should refute it and present the Shar’ee rule as the alternative. He is not allowed to elect a non-Muslim president, or a government based on non-Islam. It is not allowed for him to give the government a vote of confidence, rather he should prevent confidence in it, because the government is not established on the basis of Islam.

Hii ndiyo kanuni wazi ya Kishari'a.

This is the clear Shar’ee rule.

Hata hivyo tumewaona wakitoka, kwa mujibu wa mbinu hii ya uzushi, na maoni yanayomruhusu Muislamu kumchagua mgombea asiyefuata Shari'a katika kutunga sheria, na katika kuhesabu na kumchagua mtawala. Bali wanaruhusu kuchaguliwa kwa wagombea Wakristo, na kukubali kuingia nao katika orodha za uchaguzi, kwa kisingizio kwamba sheria imeweka idadi ya wabunge katika kila eneo. Hivyo basi mgombea Mkristo atashinda, iwe Waislamu wamemchagua au hawajamchagua. Kwa hiyo, katika hali hii, ni bora kumchagua mtu ambaye, kwa mtazamo wetu, ataleta manufaa zaidi kwa Waislamu, kuliko kuwaruhusu watu wake wamchague wakati yeye ni miongoni mwa wapinzani wetu.

However we have seen them come out, according to this innovated method, with an opinion that allows the Muslim to elect a candidate who does not adhere to the Shar’a in legislation, and in accounting and electing the ruler. Rather they allow the election of Christian candidates, and accept entering with them in election lists, under the pretext that the law has fixed the number of MPs in every area. Hence the Christian candidate will win, whether the Muslims elected him or not. Thus it is better in this situation to elect someone who, in our view, will be more beneficial to the Muslims, than to allow his people to elect him while he is of our opponents.

Hivyo ndivyo walivyo wafuasi wa mtazamo huu wanavyoendelea katika mbinu zao, ambazo kadiri wanavyozidi kuwa wengi, ndivyo wao wenyewe wanavyozidi kujitenga na ukweli.

Thus the advocates of this mentality proceed in their approaches which, the more they are, the more distant they themselves become from the truth.

Wale wanaoeneza fikra hii bunifu na mpya, pamoja na mbinu zilizo mbali na ufahamu sahihi wa Uislamu, wajue kwamba fikra zao na mbinu zao hazina uhusiano wowote na Uislamu.

Let the advocates of this innovated and new mentality, and the approaches that are far from the correct understanding of Islam, be aware that their mentality and approaches are nothing to do with Islam.

Wanachokianzisha kinahitaji toba ya kweli kutoka kwao. Da'wah ya Uislamu inawahitaji, lakini bila fikra hii, na bila mbinu hizi, ili wawe wafuasi wa Uislamu, si wa tawala zinazotawala kwa kinyume na kile ambacho Allah (SWT) amekiteremsha.

What they establish, requires true repentance from them. The da’wah to Islam needs them, but without this mentality, and without these approaches, so that they become supporters of Islam, not of the regimes that rule by other than what Allah 􀀬 has revealed.

Ufafanuzi wa mwisho wa kinachonufaisha au kinachodhuru ni wa Allah, Mola wa viumbe vyote. Hakuna anayejua kinachowaletea manufaa au kinachotuepusha na madhara isipokuwa Allah (SWT). Ikiwa hilo lingewezekana kwa mwanadamu, angekuwa mtunga sheria, wala lisingekuwepo hitaji la dini kutoka kwa Allah (SWT) inayosimamia mambo ya maisha ya binadamu. Ndiyo sababu Uislamu unamwona Muislamu kuwa na wajibu wa kushikamana na Shari'a ya Mola wake.

The decisive definition of benefit or harm is for Allah, the Lord of the worlds. Nobody knows what brings us benefits or repels harm from us, except Allah 􀀬. If that was possible for a man to do, then he would have become a legislator, and there would not have been any need for a deen from Allah 􀀬 that manages life’s affairs for man. That is why Islam considers it obligatory on the Muslim to adhere to the Shar’a of his Lord.

Chochote Shari'a inachotuamuru kukifanya ni maslahi kwetu, na chochote Shari'a iliyotuamuru kukiacha ni madhara kwetu. Hatujui kama jambo ni maslahi au madhara hadi hukumu ya sheria itakapoteremshwa kuhusiana nalo. Kabla ya hapo, si ndani ya uwezo wetu kulitambua wenyewe. Hii ni kwa sababu akili haina kipimo ambacho kwa msingi wake inaweza kutofautisha baina ya khayr (wema) na sharr (ubaya), na baina ya husn (uzuri) na qubh (ubaya wa kustahiki lawama). Kwa hiyo tunayo kanuni ya Kishari'a: 'Popote tunapopata hukumu ya Allah (Shari'a), hiyo ndiyo maslahi.' Kwa hiyo kanuni inayosema: 'Popote kilipo kitu chenye maslahi, hapo ndipo hukumu ya Allah ilipo' ni kanuni potofu.

Whatever the Shar’a orders us to do is an interest for us, and whatever the Shar’a ordered us to leave is harm for us. We do not know whether a thing is an interest or harm until a law is revealed regarding it. Before that, it is not within our ability to find it out ourselves. This is because the mind lacks a criterion on whose basis it can distinguish between the khayr (good) and sharr (bad), and between the husn (pretty) and qubh (reprehensible). Hence we have the Shar’ee principle: ‘Wherever we find the law of Allah (Shar’a), that is the benefit.’ Accordingly the principle that says: ‘Wherever is the interest, that is the law of Allah’ is wrong.

Jihadi imeandikwa kuwa ni jambo la lazima kwenu, nanyi mnaichukia; na huenda mkachukia jambo ambalo ni jema kwenu, na mkapenda jambo ambalo ni baya kwenu. Allah anajua, nanyi hamjui." [TMQ 2:216] Kwa mtazamo huu tunaweza kuelewa kauli ya Allah: "Na huwahalalishia vitu vizuri, na huwaharamishia vitu viovu" [TMQ 7:157]. Kizuri (tayyib) ni kile ambacho Allah amekihalalisha, na hatukujua kuwa ni kizuri isipokuwa baada ya Allah (SWT) kukiruhusu. Kiovu (khabeeth) ni kile ambacho Allah amekiharamisha, na hatukujua kuwa ni kiovu isipokuwa baada ya kukatazwa kwetu. Haimaanishi kwamba akili zetu ndizo zinazobainisha kipi ni kizuri hivyo zikakihalalisha, wala akili zetu ndizo zinazoamua kipi ni uovu hivyo zikakiharamisha.

This is what the following noble ayah guides us to; “Fighting is prescribed upon you, and you dislike it; and it may be that you dislike a thing that is good for you, and you love a thing that is bad for you. Allah knows and you know not.” [TMQ 2:216] From this perspective we are able to understand the saying of Allah; “And he makes the Tayyebaat (good things) halaal for them, and he makes the Khabeeth (bad things) haraam upon them” [TMQ 7:157]. The tayyib (good) is what Allah has made halaal, and we did not know it was good except after Allah 􀀬 allowed it. The khabeeth (bad) is that which Allah made haraam, and we did not know it was bad except after it was forbidden for us. It does not mean that our minds define what is good and so they made it halaal, or our minds determine what is an evil and so they forbade it.

Hii ndiyo maana yao walipo sema:Kupima jema bora kati ya mambo mawili mazuri, na ovu zaidi kati ya mambo mawili maovu, na kupata maslahi makubwa zaidi kati ya maslahi mawili kwa kuacha lile dogo zaidi, na kuondoa madhara makubwa zaidi kati ya madhara mawili kwa kuruhusu lile dogo zaidi. Kauli hii si sahihi na inaleta hatari kwa Sharee'ah. Ni hatari kubwa zaidi kuliko maoni ya Masaalih Mursalah. Hiyo ni kwa sababu masaalih huhitaji kutumiwa pale uhalisia usipokuwa na maandiko ya Sharia; lakini kwa mujibu wa kauli hii, tunawaona wakijiruhusu kubadilisha hukumu za Allah 􀀬, na kuruhusu akili zao kuzifuta. Kwa kufanya hivyo wanahalalisha yaliyoharamishwa na kuharamisha yaliyohalalishwa. Hili ni hatari kwa dini na ni mbinu hatari sana. Hii ndiyo sababu maoni na mitazamo yao iko mbali sana na ukweli.

This is what they meant when they said:Weighing up the best from two good things and the worse from two evil things, and gaining the greatest of two interests by leaving the one that is lesser, and repelling the greater of two harms by allowing the one that is lesser. This statement is wrong and it constitutes a danger to the Sharee’ah. It is graver than the opinion of Masaalih Mursalah. That is because the masaalih requires that one resort to them when the reality is devoid of a Shar’ee text; while we see them, according to this statement, permitting themselves to change the rules of Allah 􀀬, and permitting their minds to abrogate them. With this they are permitting the haraam and forbidding the halaal. This is detrimental to the deen and it is a very dangerous methodology. This is the reason why their opinions and views are so far from the truth.

Kupitia yale tuliyowasilisha tayari, tunaona kwamba misingi yao ya usuli inaendana, na inakubali kuingilia sheria ya Allah 􀀬, kwani wanaruhusu akili zao na matamanio yao kuweka kanuni za kiakili badala ya kanuni za Kishari'a, na kufikiri kwa njia ya kiakili badala ya ya Kishari'a, ili kufikia hitimisho lolote wanalotaka; si lile ambalo Shari'a inalitaka.

Through what we have already presented, we see that their Usool are in harmony with each other, and agree to interference in the legislation of Allah 􀀬, since they allow their minds and whims to put rational - rather than Shar’ee principles - and a rational - instead of Shar’ee - way of thinking, to conclude whatever they want; not what the Shar’a wants.

Ndiyo maana kipimo cha kimantiki kinachotegemea manufaa kilikuwa ndicho kanuni elekezi yao katika kila majadiliano. Hili ni licha ya ukweli kwamba kipimo cha kimantiki (qiyas al-ra'y) ni miongoni mwa mambo muhimu sana ambayo Mwenye Kutunga Sheria (Ash-Shaari') ameyakataa kwa Waislamu, kwa sababu kina upinzani dhidi ya Allah 􀀬 na ushiriki katika kutawala, na kwa sababu ni kupotoka kutoka kwenye lililo sahihi na kweli, na ni kufuata matamanio na mielekeo ya nafsi. Majadiliano yao yanajengwa juu ya kumpa hukumu Twaghuti, ambaye tumeamrishwa kumkataa. Hii ni kwa sababu Twaghuti anahukumu kwa kitu kisicho kile alichoteremsha Allah 􀀬.

That is why the rational analogy based on benefit was their guiding principle in every discussion. This is despite the fact that rational analogy is one of the most important things that the Legislator has rejected for the Muslims, because it contains opposition to Allah 􀀬 and participation in ruling, and because it is deviation from what is right and what is the truth, and it is following one’s whims and inclinations. Their discussion is based on giving arbitration to the Taghut, which we have been ordered to reject. This is because Taghut is arbitrating with other that what Allah 􀀬 has revealed.

Hitimisho, tunapaswa kugeukia kufafanua tofauti kati ya qiyas ya kiakili (ya kimantiki) na qiyas ya Kishari'a, ili kueleza upotofu wa qiyas ya kiakili na umuhimu wa kurejea qiyas ya Kishari'a, ili tuweze kujiokoa wenyewe, Ummah, na binadamu wote.

In conclusion, we must turn towards clarifying the difference between the rational analogy and the Shar’ee analogy, so as to explain the corruption of the rational analogy and the importance of refering to the Shar’ee analogy, so that we can save ourselves, the Ummah and the whole of mankind.

Waislamu hao walifuata njia ya kupima kwa akili maslahi yanayohusiana na hukumu ya Shari'ah yenyewe. Walilinganisha kati ya maslahi yanayopatikana kwa hukumu ya Shari'ah na madhara yanayotokana nayo, kwa mtazamo wa kiakili. Kwa mtazamo wao, ikiwa madhara yalikuwa makubwa zaidi, basi wangeiacha hukumu ya Shari'ah - ambayo ni hukumu ya Allah 􀀬 katika suala hilo - kwa ajili ya hukumu ya kiakili ambayo maslahi yake yalikuwa makubwa zaidi. Na ikiwa maslahi yalikuwa makubwa zaidi katika hukumu ya Shari'ah, walitenda kwa mujibu wake, si kwa sababu Allah 􀀬 aliwaamuru kufanya hivyo, bali kwa sababu akili iliridhia kuikubali. Hii ni njia hatari ambayo haiwezi kunyamaziwa.

Those Muslims proceeded on the method of rational outweghing of the interest regarding the Shar’ee rule itself. They compared between the interests secured by the Shar’ee rule and the harms that resulted from it, from a rational perspective. In their view, if the harms were greater then they would leave the Shar’ee rule - that is the rule of Allah 􀀬 on the issue - for the benefit of the rational rule whose interests were greater. If the interests were greater in the Shar’ee rule they acted upon it, not because Allah 􀀬 ordered them to do so, but because the mind agreed to accept it. This is a dangerous course about which one cannot be silent.

Hii ni kwa sababu inaupa akili na matamanio mamlaka juu ya Shari'ah, na inaipa akili nafasi ya hakimu juu ya Sheria ya Allah 􀀬, na inaiweka akili juu ya Shari'a. Hili ndilo tunaloliita sheria iliyotungwa na binadamu. Hili ndilo linaeleza kwa nini wanatoa maoni yanayopingana na hukumu za Kishari'ah, hasa katika somo hili. Kwa hiyo tofauti haipo katika suala la kama inaruhusiwa au haiuruhusiwi kushiriki katika kuhukumu kwa lisilo alilofunua Allah 􀀬. Bali mzozo upo katika namna ya kufikiri ambayo kwayo wanafikia hukumu isiyo ya Kishari'ah, hukumu ya kiakili, hukumu ya kuhukumu kwa lisilo alilofunua Allah 􀀬, na hukumu ya Twaghuti, ambayo wameamrishwa kuikataa.

This is because it gives guardianship to the mind and whims, over the Sharee’ah, and gives the mind the role of an arbitrator over the Law of Allah 􀀬, and it places the mind above the Shar’a. This is exactly what we call man-made law. This is what explains their coming out with opinions that contradict the Shar’ee rules, especially in this subject. Hence the difference is not over the opinion of whether it is allowed or not to participate in ruling by other than what Allah 􀀬 has revealed. Rather the dispute is over the way of thinking through which they arrive at the non- Shar’ee rule, at the rational rule, at the ruling with other than what Allah 􀀬 has revealed, and the rule of Taghut, which they have been ordered to reject.

Ndiyo maana tunasema kwamba njia hii ya kuelewa imepotoka na inapingana na ufahamu sahihi. Uhalisia wake unaonyesha upotofu wake. Si sahihi kuitegemea au kuchukua hukumu kulingana nayo. Hii ni kwa sababu ufafanuzi wa uhakika wa manufaa na madhara ni wa Allah, Mola wa viumbe vyote. Kitakachotuletea manufaa au kutuondolea madhara hakijulikani na yeyote isipokuwa Allah 􀀬. Hii ni kwa sababu, kama hilo lingewezekana kwa mwanadamu, basi mwanadamu angekuwa mtunga sheria. Kwa sababu ya haja ya dini ya kimungu inayosimamia mambo ya maisha kwa ajili ya mwanadamu, Uislamu umeona kuwa Muislamu analazimika kushikamana na Shari'a ya Mola wake.

That is why we say this way of understanding eludes and disagrees with the correct understanding. Its reality indicates its falsehood. It is not correct to depend on it or to take rules according to it. That is because the decisive definition of the benefits and harms is for Allah, the Lord of the worlds. What will bring the benefits to us or repel the harm from us is not known to anyone except Allah 􀀬. This is because if that were possible for man, then man would have been the legislator. Due to the need for a divine religion that manages life’s affairs for man, Islam has considered that the Muslim is obliged to adhere to the Shar’a of his Lord.

Kwa hiyo, kile ambacho Shar'a imetuamuru kukifanya kinachukuliwa kuwa ni maslahi kwetu, na kile ambacho Shar'a imetuamuru kukiacha ni madhara kwetu. Hatujui kwamba jambo fulani ni maslahi au madhara, isipokuwa baada ya hukumu kuhusu jambo hilo kuteremshwa. Kabla ya hapo, hatuwezi kulibainisha hilo kwa nafsi zetu wenyewe.

Hence what the Shar’a has ordered us to do is considered to be an interest for us, and what the Shar’a has ordered us to leave is a harm for us. We do not know that a thing is an interest or harm, except after a law has been revealed about it. Before that, we are unable to define that by ourselves.

Wakati mwanadamu anapotunga sheria, hufuata njia ya kulinganisha kwa akili, ambayo inahitaji kuunganisha mambo yanayofanana na kuyapa hukumu zinazofanana. Pia inahitaji kutofautisha mambo yaliyo tofauti na kuyapa hukumu tofauti. Tunapotazama Sharia ya Kiislamu iliyowekwa na Mwenye ujuzi wote na Mwenye habari zote, tunaona kwamba imetoa hukumu tofauti kwa mambo mengi yanayofanana, na imetoa hukumu zinazofanana kwa mambo mengi tofauti. Hili ni kinyume cha kulinganisha kwa akili. Pia imetoa hukumu ambazo akili haina nafasi ndani yake. Hili peke yake linatosha kuukanusha mbinu hii ya kibunifu ambayo watu hao wameianzisha.

When man legislates, he follows the way of the rational analogy, which requires the bringing together of similar matters and giving them similar rules. It also requires differentiating between different matters and giving them different rulings. When we look at the Islamic Sharee’ah that has been legislated by the All-Knowing and All-Informed, we find that it has given different rules for many similar matters, and has given similar rules for many different matters. This is contrary to the rational analogy. It has also given rules in which the mind plays no role. This alone is enough to refute this innovated method that those people have initiated.