How are we to progress the discussion if you do not provide me with a definition of Ahad hadith?

I think you should tell the Muslims of Palestine,Kashmir, Iraq, Chechnya etc... that they are to blame for being killed not the Kufr who are dropping the bombs.

Please add your support and sign the online petition at: http://www.mindspring.eu.com/petition/

You refuse to acknowledge the contradiction in your definition. Can you give a definition of Ahad hadith like that you have given for Mutawatir, Jazakallah Khair.

They are not winning the war on terror because it is a war on Islam and unless the Muslims see it as such they will win the war.

Im not disputing that ahad hadith can be sahih, all i am asking for is your definiton of ahad hadith, you stated: "Mutawaatir refers to a hadith whose narrators in each level of its chain of transmission are so numerous that it is not possible for all of them to have conspired in falsehood - whether intentionally or mistakenly. The aahaad is a hadith that does not meet the requirement for the mutawaatir hadith" Therefore what i deduce from your definition is that ahad hadith: is insufficient narrators for the purpose of eliminating a 'possibility' of falsehood either deliberate or non deliberate. I ask do you agree, otherwise the definition you give is a contradiction. Im not talking about anything else at this point just merely the definition, not aqeedah, not sahihness. I tend to agree with Rahima's suggestion, however i will leave it to you to decide.

"Mutawaatir refers to a hadith whose narrators in each level of its chain of transmission are so numerous that it is not possible for all of them to have conspired in falsehood - whether intentionally or mistakenly. The aahaad is a hadith that does not meet the requirement for the mutawaatir hadith" Therefore the ahad hadith is insufficient narrators for the purpose of eliminating a 'possibility' of falsehood either deliberate or non deliberate. Do you agree, otherwise the definition you give is a contradiction.

As far as establishing matters of Aqidah is concerned, the majority of the scholars are of the view that Ahad may not be relied upon as the basis of belief (aqidah), for matters of belief must be founded in certainty. Therefore, issues that revolve between belief (iman) and disbelief (kufr) can not be proven by Ahad narrations (Fawatih al-Rahmut, 2/136).

If we agree on the definiton then we agree that ahad hadith throught the number of narrations may contain some doubt because not enough people have narrated it to remove doubt. How can you have doubt in your aqeedah?

Salafi i agree to the conditions, maybe we can start with the two points i have responded to you one: - Ahad hadith - The Kingdom ruling by Kufr

Salafi_online: Inshallah I will respond to your points on Nasiyya, however can you respond to my clarification on Ahad Hadith and the Kingdom ruling by Kufr and explain any further disagreements or agreement in which case you should withdraw your accusations. The understanding on Nasiyyah yes there are aspects that you give in private as in the case of something you see wrong in a brother you correct the brother as it is better to conceal the sins of a brother. As to those who openly commit kufr, then we should openly account them to protect the ummah from them. The glorious scholars of Islam exemplify this, did not the Prophet (saw) openly criticise the rulers of Quraish, has Allah (swt) not openly criticesed the Leaders of Quraish in the Quran. In the rulership of Umar during a khutbah he asked to be obeyed but a Sahabi got up and said no we will not obey, when Umar enquired as to why he would not obey? the Sahabi said that a one piece cloth was distributed to everybody yet you are wearing two. At this point Umar sons spoke and explained that he had given his cloth to his father because he was a large man and one cloth did not cover him. Where was the private nasiyyah here? As to the philosphy of Hizb ut Tahrir it is Islam – you can bring any aspect of there work and there will be evidence for it. If you look at the methodology to Establish the Islmaic state anyone with the knowledge of the seerah will see the clear analogy to method used. If you have sepcific questions I am more that happy to try and answer or find out the answer.

if you could respond to my counter arguments then maybe we can move onto another argument. Jazakallah Khair.

The Saudi Rulers and Oil As the price of oil continues to rise, Saudi Arabia recently announced that she would ‘save’ the world economy by increasing her overall production, against the wishes of other OPEC members. As the world’s largest exporters of oil, the Saudi regime claims it has a duty to ensure that oil prices remain stable and cheap for a global economy which has come to depend so heavily on oil. Saudi’s role in the world is defined exclusively by her production of oil, without which she is impotent. Her recent pledge to increase oil production and soothe spiralling prices for the benefit of western economies bears testament to this. Herein lies the principal problem for the House of Al-Saud. As world oil reserves are predicted to peak within the next fifty years, global energy markets will inevitably begin to shift towards alternative sources of fuel. To prepare for the inevitable depletion of fossil fuels, ESSO and BP have already begun to develop alternative sustainable energy formats. Yet the question must be asked, although the west has clearly begun to prepare for this eventuality, what are the Saudi’s doing? Remarkably, despite the Saudi economy relying almost exclusively on the sale of oil for national revenues, it would appear as though hardly any industries or technologies are being developed for long term sustainability. Thus, although Riyadh is rapidly acquiring the image of a rich and sprawling metropolis, with a skyline to rival that of any western capital, her future in a post-oil era appears to be uncertain. Rising levels of national debt and an increasing poverty gap between the rich and poor suggest that Saudi, like other countries in the Muslim world, will quickly succumb to a future characterised by debt and poverty. The Al-Saud’s have failed miserably to look after the people’s interests and build a sustainable economy. Squandering oil revenues on their own hedonistic luxuries the Saudi regime continues to neglect an impending disaster. The royal family’s indifference towards this problem almost certainly confirms that Saudi will quickly fall into the same poverty trap which now consumes the Muslim world once the oil finally runs dry. However, the future need not look so bleak. Countries like India and China have recently developed their economies by developing strong national industries across a range of different service sectors. Yet, the Saudi’s look unlikely to follow in their footsteps. Lacking both the will and the determination to invest in such projects they continue, like other rulers in the Muslim world, to squander the Ummah’s wealth on their own luxuries. This incident clearly represents how the Saudi regime, like all others in the Muslim world, works only to secure western interests and not those of the Muslim Ummah. Not only are they unable to administer the affairs of the Muslims, but crucially, they are also unwilling. The pittance they receive in return for their slavish subservience to western interests is only spent on enhancing their already hedonistic lifestyles. It is this acquiescence and indifference to the plight of the Ummah which has earned them the wrath of the Muslims worldwide. The Prophet (saw) explained, “The best of your imams (leaders) are those whom you love them and they love you, and you pray for them and they pray for you. And the worst of your leaders are those whom you hate them and they hate you, and you curse them and they curse you.” [Recorded by Muslim from `Awf Bin Maalik] The Saudi rulers have clearly revealed their allegiance to the western powers and their contempt for Islam and the Muslims. Muslims in the West must expose the corrupt Muslim rulers whose treachery, cowardice and excesses become clearer by the day and must similarly articulate the case for the sincere Islamic leadership as a viable and practical alternative. Asim Khan Source: www.1924.org (corrupt source according to salafi_online, so beware).

Fair enough i will try to improve.

Why?

Sorry if i have not answered your questions. The issue of Saudi is they rule with other than what Allah (swt) has revealed. What we see is many examples of this e.g. - Non Saudis are not alllowed residence - They recognise borders - Fahd is not a legitmate ruler from Islam - They seek the judgement of the UN and US The issue on ahad hadith is clear: There are two types of hadith in terms of narration, Ahad where the narrations are 1 or fewer that Mutawtir. Mutawatir there are that many narrations that the hadith could not have been misreported. From these two definitions it is clear that Ahad may contain doubt as the narrations are to few and mutwatir there is 100% certainty. Hence we now look at aqeedah, aqeedah is that which we have firm belief in therefore it cannot contain doubt hence you cannot take ahad hadith into aqeedah. To give an example lets look at the collection of the Quran, it was collected with it being checked by many companions hence the defintion of the Quran is the revealed speech of Allah (swt) that has been given to Muahmmed (saw) contained in the Mushaf of Uthman (ra) through tawatur (mutawatir) narrations... Hence we see that ahad narrations were not accepted into the Quran because it is something we have 100% certainty in. So how can we take ahad into aqeedah, we definately beleive in it but do not take something that may have doubt init into aqeedah. I hope this has answered your questions, if i have missed any please advise. A quick question though on Fahd, do you see him as Amir ul Muminoon?

Bush wants to claim that with the new Constitution passed, power will be turned over to Iraqis after June of this year. It's a lie. The new government under the new constitution will be barred from overturning any laws that the US has imposed on the country since the Occupation. Why can't they change them? Because of this provision in the Constitution, Article 26: A) Except as otherwise provided in this Law, the laws in force in Iraq on 30 June 2004 shall remain in effect unless and until rescinded or amended by the Iraqi Transitional Government in accordance with this Law. Note that the "Iraqi Transitional Government" doesn't come into existence until new elections occur, which can be as late as December 2005-- a long period to be governed by Paul Bremer's recently enacted pro-corporate laws. I saw author Naomi Klein lecturing over the weekend and she had an intriguing argument why this provision could make the post-constitution Occupation even worse for Iraqis than when the US directly controlled the country. As she argued last fall, the Bush Administration goals of privatizing the country face a stumbling block right now-- it's illegal as long as the US directly controls the country. The US was giving sanction by the UN for Occupation, with the US's own vote, only conditional on its agreement to "comply fully with their obligations under international law including in particular the Geneva conventions of 1949 and the Hague regulations of 1907." So what do the Hague regulations say: The Hague regulations state that an occupying power must respect "unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country". The coalition provisional authority has shredded that simple rule with gleeful defiance. Iraq's constitution outlaws the privatisation of key state assets, and it bars foreigners from owning Iraqi firms. The point of those regulations is to stop the looting of countries by occupying powers-- obviously a good idea when dealing with a government in bed with Halliburton. But as Klein argues, a "sovereign" Iraqi government could proceed legally with privatizing the country. So having passed privatization and rightwing laws to encourage the financial stripping of the country BEFORE turning over the country, Article 26 requires the new "sovereign" Iraqi government to IMPLEMENT those laws, thereby giving them retroactive legal sanction. Don't believe the hype-- with Article 26, the Occupation continues after June. A government that cannot change US-imposed laws is nothing more than a remote controlled puppet regime.

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحِيمِِ وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُم فِي الأَرْضِ كَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِيـنَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذي ارْتَضَى لَهُمْ وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُم مِّن بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْنًا يَعْبُدُونَنِي لا يُشْرِكُونَ بِي شَيْئًا وَمَن كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُون “Allah has promised to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that of a certainty, He will cause them to accede to power on earth, as He granted it to those before them, that He will establish in authority their Deen which he has chosen for them, and that He will change (their state) after the fear in which they lived, to one of security and peace: They will worship Me (alone) and not ascribe powers to any beside Me” [TMQ 24: 55]. Press Release US plans to invade Sudan Reports in the Emirates newspapers ‘Al-Khaleej’ on 1/05/2004, and ‘Al-Wifaq’ on 2/05/2004 indicate that the US is mulling over plans to send a 75,000-strong force to Sudan. ‘Al-Wifaq’ stated that ”the Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee that the US needs a 75,000-member peacekeeping force to intervene in various countries like Sudan”. Armitage added, “this program will cost about $100 million for the first year and $660 million over the five-year life of the program”. In supporting this initiative, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz mentioned, ”this force could intervene in countries like Sudan, where civil war has led to the displacement of thousands of people”. Clearly, such an announcement at this moment in time is primarily aimed at the Sudanese government ― pressing them to further compromise and withdraw ― during the so-called peaceful (or rather, treacherous) negotiations in Nifasha, where the government has already conceded ground on numerous points. Ultimately, the result will be more division of the land and further exploitation of the resources. The actions by both the government and the opposition in order to appease the US are nothing but treachery towards Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (salallahu alayhi wasallam) and the subjugation of the country and the people’s rights. While the American envoys are traversing the land from east to west, acting as if they are the real rulers of the country, they are, in reality, preparing for the invasion of Sudan. The outcome will be just as it was in Iraq where they spread corruption, tortured and frightened away thousands of Muslims, exploited the resources, disgraced mosques, destroyed houses, and abused prisoners with the most horrific and disgraceful physical treatment, and continue to do so. This is due to their blind crusade of hatred regarding which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said: وَدُّواْ مَا عَنِتُّمْ قَدْ بَدَتِ الْبَغْضَاء مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَمَا تُخْفِي صُدُورُهُمْ أَكْبَرُ قَدْ بَيَّنَّا لَكُمُ الآيَاتِ إِن كُنتُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ "They desire to harm you severely. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse. Indeed We have made plain to you the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses) if you understand" [TMQ 3: 118]. Oh Muslims of Sudan! Following this press release, is it possible for any believer or sane person amongst you to accept this reality and keep silent over this blatant American and Western interference in our affairs? By Allah! if we remain indifferent and consent to what is happening we will be allowing the Kuffar to do in Sudan exactly what they are doing to our brothers in Iraq. The work obliged upon us, in order to secure our land form the danger of American invasion, is to strive to make Islam the foundation of our life and ruling system through the re-establishment of the righteous Khilafah State, which will reinvigorate the Muslim forces so that they decisively confront the US and other disbelieving Western countries, thereby protecting our blood and safeguarding our honour. The Messenger of Allah (salallahu alayhi wasallam) said: إنّمَا الإِمَامُ جُنّةٌ. يُقَاتَلُ مِنْ وَرَائِهِ. وَيُتّقَىَ بِهِ “Indeed, the Imam is a shield behind whom the Muslims fight and protect themselves.” [Muslim] Ibraheem 'Uthman (Abu Khaleel) The official spokesman of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Sudan 03/05/2004

I apologise for the mistake on the narration of Imam Ahmad, i get the two incidents mixed up regarding the persecetion the two great imams went through. As to you accusations against the hizb, i believe i have explained the issue of ahad hadith on another thread, i will find it and repost it here (sometimes i do not get access to all the threads, is this just me or do others find this?) You made some serious accusations you now need to bring the proof for your accusations. What is specifically wrong with 1924 website? Shiekh Taqi? Hizb? So is King Fahd Ameer ul Muminoon? have you given your bayah to him? Ruling by shirk is that not spreading fitna? Muslims having to live there lives according to other than what Allah (swt) has revealed is that not spreading fitna. What is your solution that your scholars push to rectify the position of the Muslims? What is your method to fulfill the obligation of Khilfah? The Ahl e Hadith say that you can vote for Kufr, is this the same twisted view of the Salfi's?

I think the brother got my name wrong its truth seeker. As to the point that i cause fitna, how? By me calling for unity? having one leader? calling for the implementation of Islam? work to fulfill the obligations of Allah (swt)? I'l lay my cards on the table, the reality is i did have a lot of respect for the salaf as they claimed to follow the sunnah yet when it comes to politics they abandon it. This whole issue of attacking the leaders is so salafi, you cant do that it will cause fitna, ive heard the salafi rhetoric and this whole issue that the scholars give private nasiyya to the leaders to avoid fitna. What is the evidence to support this. The reality is these scholars by not clearly denouncing the leaders for ruling by other than what Allah (swt) has revealed give legitmacy to the rulers and are part of there treachery. The example of Imam Malik when the Mutazila wanted him to say the Quran was created was not to give private guidace to them but clearly make the ummah know of the incorrect thought. At the time of Umar bin Khattab he asked the people who would account him for what he did, a sahabi stood up with his sword and said i will with this sword. Not i'l have a private chat with you. The reality is the scholars have a huge responsibility and that is to speak the truth that is why the Prophet (saw) that they are the inheritors of the prophets. I dont want to get into a whole salafi discussion but the general point is that why when it comes to politics nobody wants to know?, when it comes to condeming the Ummah they are all ready but when it comes to the leaders theres such restraint. Look at Ibn Taymia did he give private guidance to the rulers? no he was clear on the role of the scholar and was prisoned for his work. Which of these scholars is languishing in the prisons???????????

Still hasnt spoken out against the Saudi's?

I notice how the name of Shaikh bin Baz was not mentioned and his notorious fatwa. You quote all these scholars saying about Iraq yet they do not say anything about the kingdom ruling by kufr... or am i wrong, actually they are the scholars in the prisons. A general point on the salaf, i find it astounding that they fail to criticise the rulers for ruling by kufr (in some cases even shirk) yet love to say how the ummah is destroyed as it associates partners with Allah.

I say a lot of people because the majority of the people that i have come accross that disagree with the hizb dont have a clue to be frank. I respect your view becuase you have at least looked at the party and disagree with an aspect. thats better than the general person that disagrees without knowing anything. As to your points: Ahad hadith - first of all what we have to understand is that aqeedah is something that is definate i.e. we cannot have doubt in it. This then comes down to how the scholars classed hadith. Two classifications Ahad and Mutawatir (there are other classifications but this looks at the number of narrators and this is the area of discussion). Ahad is that which is singularly narrated or less than what is required for mutawatir and mutawatir is something that so many people have narrated it that they could not have conspired to produce a false hadith meaning there is no doubt in it. Hence we have ahad hadith that we accept as evidence but not into aqeedah because it is not 100%. Mutawatir is something that is 100% e.g. the Quran has been transmitted to us by mutawatir narrations. Other Groups – This looks at the issue of the Khilafah as an obligation and to fulfill that obligation you have to work towards it. This is the primary reason why other groups are neglectful of this duty and carry out duties that essentially are the obligation of the state to provide. The issue is clear Khilafah is an obligation and any group that is working for it using a method that has been derived from the Islamic texts is fine. What the Hizb is – The hizb works within the ummah to resume the Islamic way of life through establishing al Khilafah using the method of Prophethood. Essentially (this is a very brief yet succinct points, there are volumes that supplement these points) the prophet (saw) undertook three key stages in Establishing the deen of islam: 1) Private culturing – this was done to people who the prophet thought would be receptive to the message e.g. his (saw) wife, friends (Abu Bakr r.a.) and family (Ali r.a.) and may they all be rewarded by Allah azza wa jal and may Allah (swt) let us follow in their footsteps. 2) Openly proclaiming the message to society challenging the false thoughts in society (idol worshipping, burying daughters alive, cheating etc…) 3) Seeking the support of those capable to give the authority to the Prophet (saw) to establish the state, the prophet (saw) went to many tribes. Taif being the most famous. The role of the hizb is clear on this methodology: 1) Culture people to be able to carry the correct though into society to challenge the false way of life. With the concentrated culturing of Islam. 2) Challenge the corrupt ideologies that exist and govern how people live their lives e.g. capitalism, secularism, democracy, socialism. Using the various halal styles available such as internet chat forums. 3) Seek the support of those in authority (primarily the military) to assume dar ul islam. The hizb works to protect the Islamic thought in the ummah by making it aware of the colonialists agendas and the correct Islamic verdict on issues and that Islam in its entirety is the only valid and necessary solution. Hence you see the current campaign to highlight the fallacy of the june 30th hand over to the puppet (western installed) iraqi regime. The other point I would like to make is that you do not support anybody that is against the Iraq occupation but only those using Islam as the basis for their opposition hence I would not support France in its objections.

Dear Brothers and Sisters, As you are aware, on the 30th June, the US is handing back ‘sovereignty’ to the people of Iraq. This handover is a deceptive initiative, aimed at superficially changing the political leadership, but keeping Iraq under its sphere of influence. Indeed the hand picked Iraqi Interim government will ensure US interests are secured. Towards the lead up to elections, the environment will be set such that a US viceroy is appointed. Even the much hailed UN Security Council Resolution 1546 aims at using and abusing the UN to consolidate US and British intentions to control the future security, government, economy, culture and strategic assets of Iraq. In sum, the US plans to establish another subordinate state, like Saudi Arabia and all the countries plaguing the Muslim World. In the words of former State Department official Henry J. Barkey, "The reality is that most power will be transferred to the U.S. ambassador". Dear Brothers and Sisters, The Muslim community needs to expose the intentions of the US and Britain. It is clear that the governments in the western world work according to their interests and until we, the Muslim community, raise the debate in the heart of the west against western interference, we will not be able to create an environment where these governments are questioned by a strong public opinion. This opinion cannot be changed by superficial actions and arguments. Rather what is required is for our community to use these opportunities to debate western foreign policy at all levels of society. We need to contact the western intelligentsia, address the media with strength of argument, speak to the business community and raise the debate with the masses in Britain. This is where we need your support. We recognise that the strength of this work requires all organisations, leaders and members of our community to carry this message. In the coming weeks we are going to prepare a dossier cataloguing western interference in Iraq as well as material to raise the debate with the public. This dossier will be presented and debated with western policy makers, thinkers and academics. We ask you to assist us with our project and support it with all the means you have. In the coming days leading up to the 30th June, we will be informing you of our campaign and the key features of it. However if you can help – please contact us. In particular we plan to do the following: Distribute an awareness leaflet to the public on the weekend of the 26th and 27th in all major cities up and down the country. Distribute outside Train and Underground stations on the 28th and 29th June. Hold a broad panel conference, showing a unified front from the Muslim community on the 30th June. Collect a petition from Muslim and non-Muslims subscribing to a statement condemning the 30th June handover as a cloak to hide the occupation. Please do your best to contribute what you can to this campaign. If you want further information, have suggestions to help spread this message widely or if you want to join our campaign – please email Info@mindspring.eu.com The campaign website is www.Mindspring.eu.com May Allah (swt) reward you and may this be the beginning of addressing western public opinion with intelligence, strength of argument and wisdom. Your brother in Islam, Jalaluddin Patel On behalf of Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain.

A lot of people need to get away from this whole HT stigma, how many peole have really looked at the group, its literature, websites, campaigns, objective and made their opinon from that rather than listen to hearsay. People that slate HT without having looked at this should fear Allah and remember they will be accounted for what they said and did. If someone has a point against HT then they should make the specific point rather than generalisations. The party clearly from its literture only uses Islam for its work in terms of method, style and action. As to the point of using kufr laws, where have they? they do not lobby MP's! rather they work to move the Muslims to work for the Establishment of the Islamic way of life. The point in discussing with the west is to highlight in this atmosphere of your a terrorist! they are working to show Islam as a valid and neccessary alternative to their lives. Hopefully people can get involved in this work rather than crticise where there is no criticism to be made.