The Indian Establishment: Lost Sensibility or Blinkered Arrogance

Indian Parliament

It may be surprising for many to read this however the truth is that there were many states that never gave their loyalty to the Indian Establishment at the time of India�s independence in 1947. Under the leadership of the ruthless hardline lawyer, Vallabbhai Patel, the Indian Government purchased the loyalty from over 500 princes and royals giving them perks and privileges in modern india and arm twisting those who didn�t like to budge and had become accustomed to being in power.

The Indian Establishment went as far as sacrificing over 20,000 to ensure that certain states like Hyderabad didn�t side with Pakistan at the time of independence.

Apart from this, the six north eastern states which are still seen with questioning eyes where India still implements its illegal AFSPA act giving the armed forces sweeping powers over the civilians never ratified the unification with India. Culturally, linguistically & religiously these states never saw themselves as a part of India apart from the fact that they were only linked to the larger part of India by a 12 km wide tract of land just like the neck of a rooster.

It�s not far from truth to say that the actual control the Indian Establishment has had over India has not been more than 60 to 70% at any point of time. Many times it has been lower than that. These are official figures which the government itself releases from time to time.

For instance, the governments control in the Naxal areas is very limited. The red corridor, a term used to denote the Naxal infested areas, covered 180 districts out of 640 in 2009.

Political Vacuum�s within India

Organizations like the panchayat (village committees) and the tribal committees which have been part of the daily lives of people in villages and towns for centuries have over the years filled the vacuum which was left after the Mughal and subsequently the British Rule.

Grassroots organizations which have worked to become part of thesepanchayats have been able to win the hearts of the masses and been able to turn them loyal to the government and in cases disloyal to the government as has been the case with the Naxalites and Maoists who have worked to assist 100�s of villages in the Red corridor and thereby buying their loyalty.

It is in circumstances such as these, when an atmosphere of hatred against Islam is already widespread, even small rumors can lead to a major tension.

And when something like this happens which is beyond the control of the government, the choices they make are based on whether the results of such frictions benefit them or not. Every word its leadership says, every action it takes is measured and calculated and its repercussion assessed.

It is in this light that the recent Dadri killing should be seen or even incidents before that, like the Gujarat riots or even those before that.

Effects of Communal tensions on India�s global Image

The Indian leadership does not see the incident in Dadri as a damaging incident internationally, as this incident was much smaller compared to the communal tensions that have happened in India in the past 60 years. India is witness to over 50000 riots since its independence and over 600 riots since the recent elections. Killing one man doesn�t add to the already blacked face it carries. Not to mention that the governing party and its leadership are people who have been the face of one of the largest massacres of the Muslims in India and globally.

However it definitely helps it solidify its image, that the existing government will turn a blind eye towards right wingers and will support those who carry the idea of turning India into a Hindu Nation.

And not to forget that some of the world�s biggest powers are known to have severely oppressed their minorities and this includes the USA in its treatment to the blacks and the Chinese in its treatment of the Muslims. So India happens to come closer to their league not move away from them.

As for the global image that India is trying to build as a hub for Business, these incidents don�t create a challenge for India. The Capitalist businessmen who will want to come and exploit the cheap labor and cheap human resource in India just like the East India Company did wouldn�t worry because of the secure environment the Indian government promises them for business. Not to mention that these Capitalists themselves are not on morally high grounds for wherever they have gone they have abused the land and its people and its resources. So they are pretty much on the same page.

One thing however that may have gone unnoticed is that so many Indian academics, secular thinkers, historians have come forth and asked the government to rethink its policies and have openly questioned the government�s attitude and its support to right wingers, this is specially after the recent Dadri incident.

And there is clearly a sense of panic in many of them. The reason is simple.

BJP is still an immature nascent party with little experience in national politics and with a lack of serious thinkers and policy makers, to the extent that they did not even have qualified lawmakers to take important cabinet positions, so they had to appoint an unelected lawmaker as the minister of 4 ministries?�?defense, finance, corporate affairs, information & broadcast combined. This is one of the reasons their behavior is amateur and unprincipled from the Secular point of view.

The government leaderships delay and silence on atrocities committed against the minorities will only disenchant the minorities and disintegrate them from the larger society, a task that the previous governments worked so hard to achieve. And this is what these secular thinkers are worried about. A continuous atmosphere of communal hatred and tensions will only lead to the disintegration of the Muslims from the larger Indian society.

Is it just bad news and more bad news ?

A disenchanted and disintegrated community generally can go into 2 directions, either isolate themselves or stand up and fight for their rights.

This is the silver lining for the Muslim activists and dawa carriers today. This is their opportunity to go on the grassroots and rebuild the confidence in the people.

They have the opportunity to show them the failure of the Secular Politics and Democracy. They should show them how their decades of belief and trust could be shed away in one go. They should show them how scholars of madrasas like Deoband went to the extent of banning Cow slaughter but still their loyalty is questioned. They should show them that the only way out for them is Islam. And that Democracy and Secular politics could never give them their rights. And that the true protector of their honour, their wealth and their lives would be a sincere leader who wouldn�t turn a blind eye when they are killed.

This is perhaps their only opportunity to recreate a strong revivalist movement in the Muslims in India, a modern Khilafat Movement, calling towards the reestablishment of the Khilafah Rashidah in the Muslim world who will implement Islam and fight for the rights of Muslims globally.

Let us remember what Allah (swt) said in Surah Ahzab

?????????? ??????? ????????????? ???????????? ??????????? ??????????????? ???? ????? ???? ??????? ?????????? ????? ??????? ????? ???????? ????????

(All this happened) so that Allah may give reward to the truthful ones for their truthfulness, and punish the hypocrites, if He so wills, or accept their repentance. Surely, Allah is Most-Forgiving, Very- Merciful. [TMQ Ahzab: 24]

This should comfort everyone who has been worried, and he should realize that this is his opportunity like the companions opportunity at the Khandaq to please Allah (swt).

Abu Khaled Al Hejazi
https://medium.com/@fikr_mustanir/the-indian-establishment-lost-sensibility-or-blinkered-arrogance-93831484eacf

Only Islam can fulfil the duty towards refugees

Waseem Abu Ilyas

The mass movement of people across Europe has been described in the last week as the biggest refugee crisis to hit Europe since World War II. Thousands of refugees are now crisscrossing the continent looking for sanctuary from their war torn and broken lives. Walking along railway tracks, traveling on boat and some ultimately suffocating in the backs of trucks; men, women and children are going to extraordinary lengths to escape their homelands.

Whilst the exodus from lands such as Syria has been going on for months the refugee crisis has only ever been discussed in the same breath as immigration and illegal migrants. The European attitude has been to the refugees to travel as far away from their own country as possible and explain away the thousands camping at �The Jungle� in Calais as those looking for an easy benefit driven life in the UK.  There has been little or no acknowledgement that the vast majority now traveling across nations are fleeing war and persecution and are in fact refugees and not economic migrants.

Images of waves lapping over the drowned corpse of the young Syrian boy Aylan Kurdi aged three may have shocked the world and embarrassed European political leaders such as David Cameron into acknowledging the crisis. However it also exposed the lack of understanding and insight many have towards the refugee issue. Whilst the disregard of Western governments to the suffering of humanity is clear from their colonial past, they remain in denial about how this past has shaped the current crisis.  It would be foolish to think that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the propping up of dictators such as Bashar al-Assad and the political vacuums created by competing western powers in Libya and beyond played no part in thousands fleeing their homes. In fact if the truth were to be investigated then any conclusion not putting Sykes-Picot at the centre of the current political turmoil in the Middle East and thus the mass exodus of people would be flawed.

The destruction of the Ottoman state, the imposition of dictators loyal to the West and economic subjugation has made life in much of the Middle East unbearable for those who were born and live there.  Once all this is understood it clearly highlights the hypocrisy of the solutions being proposed by the likes of David Cameron. Headlines of the UK of pledging to accept thousands of Syrian refugees and images of Germans welcoming hundreds into their homes may do much to restore the faith in humanity for some. However if these same headlines were juxtaposed with the images of the destruction and mayhem Western policies have caused then there would be little to feel proud of. This is not to second guess the generosity of the average person who simply wants to help but to see through the crocodile tears of colonial Europe.

Preventing the trafficking gangs from putting hundreds of people on boats may stop the influx into Europe but it will never quell the basic human instinct to survive and seek safety. Fences along borders and Calais will keep out the unwanted refugees but they simply act as a metaphor the inhumanity of national borders which prevent those seeking help from getting it.

The Hungarian government would rather have hundreds sleep rough on train tracks and in railway stations than allow them to travel to Germany and Austria.  Squabbling over who should bear the burden of helping the poor and destitute, only to then dump refugees over the border with an out of sight out of mind attitude. Europe is meant to empitimise the free movement of people yet when those people are refugees then the rules seem not to apply. If it were not for the false borders created in the Muslim lands then there is little doubt that the masses of the Ummah would have no hesitation in aiding their own brothers and sisters. Muslims governments such as Saudi Arabia pledge millions to set up camps in Jordan not out of love for the Ummah but to ensure the problem does not come to their own doorstep.

The sad fact of the matter is that even the non-Muslims such as Douglas Murray are questioning the lack of real action by the Muslim world to solve the refugee crisis. It is not a hidden truth anymore that the rulers of the Muslim lands have no love for their own people let alone those from another state. The rulers have become pawns in the geopolitical games of the Western world and most the time do not even pay lip service to the suffering of their Muslim brothers and sisters.

The West on the other hand having created and exacerbated the problems in the Muslim lands take the view that human beings be they refugee or not are simple a commodity. The �moral duty� to help is driven by economics and economics alone. Pressure on the NHS, Housing and Schools are all cited as potential drawbacks to allowing more refugees into the UK. Some even question the open arms generosity that Germany is displaying towards Syrian refugees, highlighting the falling population growth in Germany and its need for a larger labour force in the years to come. Mirroring the immigration to the UK from the Commonwealth nations in the 1960�s and 1970�s.  The Capitalist ideology devoid of humanity can only view a problem and any potential solution from a profit loss relationship.

The constant barrage of media hype and government spin has the average Joe Public believing that austerity , economic downturn and job losses are down to those moving to the UK. It is seen as heresy to even question the defunct and flawed nature of an economic system which puts bankers ahead of food banks and benefit cuts ahead of pursuing tax evading multinationals.

If it were not for having an alternative ideology by which to judge such events by, Muslims would most likely fall into the same trap as the Western world. Examining each action from the viewpoint of benefit.  Yet the earliest history of Islam gave us clear examples of how to treat those leaving their homes to flee persecution.

The noblest migration was the Hijrah of Mohammad (saw) from Mecca to Medina, the best aid was that of the Ansar (helpers) towards the Muhajireen (emigrants) who had left Mecca to come for a better life in the company of the Prophet (saw) in the first Islamic state.

Prophet Mohammad (saw) told the Ansar that the Muhajireen were brothers to them and even paired them off as brothers, the Ansar allowed the Muhajireen to work alongside them and even aided them in marriage.  Not based on economic benefit or the need for labour but due to the command of Allah (swt)

�And [also for] those who were settled in al-Madinah and [adopted] the faith before them. They love those who emigrated to them and find not any want in their breasts of what the emigrants were given but give [them] preference over themselves, even though they are in privation. And whoever is protected from the stinginess of his soul � it is those who will be the successful.� [59:9]

Bhopal's historic Shaukat Mahal facade brought down: Destruction of heritage due to apathy of government, civic authorities

  (C) Indscribe

Shukat Mahal palace, a unique example of Indo-French structure, built during the reign of Nawab Qudsia Begam nearly 180 years ago, was in the need for restoration and it was repeatedly brought to the notice of authorities.

Yet, there was no attempt to save and strengthen the heritage building and when a crack developed on the facade of the structure this week, the civic authorities instantly went and demolished the portion--crown and two storeys on the front.

This shameless display of apathy towards heritage is common place in the country, despite growing awareness about need to conserve the past and save the heritage structures.

Bhopal--City of Lakes, Palaces, Monuments, Mosques

Bhopal is among the few cities that have have such abundance of heritage structures--palaces, historic structures and gates.Take for example, the royal complex near Moti Masjid, you will be overwhelmed by the grandeur of imposing buildings of the era when Bhopal was a princely state.

On one hand, you have Gauhar Mahal, the beautiful Baab-e-Sikandari gates, while adjacent to it is Moti Mahal. Further, the Shaukat Mahal, Sheesh Mahal, Sadar Manzil and Humayun Manzil, along with the Moti Masjid and Minar-e-Iqbal, turn the place majestic.

But successive governments and civic authorities have turned a blind eye to the restoration of these structures.

The city of lakes has so much for tourists, yet, authorities have failed to even project it as a tourist destination.

In fact, despite monuments, lakes, museums, mosques and dozens of tourist attractions, government has totally failed to harness the potential.

Demolition easier than restoration!

Worse, the structures are crumbling and there is no attempt to save them--either on one pretext or the other.

If one structure can't be protected because it is either Waqf property, or it can't be saved because it is not under a particular department's jurisdiction.

There are so many bahaanaas, the pretexts--for yet another monument there is 'lack of budget' or a particular monument is 'private property'.

The truth is harsh. Successive chief ministers and civic administrators have no vision and as a result the monuments are being destroyed.

Citizens do share a part of blame. But this is also a fact that people came on the streets to save structures in the past, which government wanted to demolish.

Especially, in the case of Jumerati Gate and Old post Office. Majority of officials and ministers have little interest in saving heritage.

Hence, handful of activists and protesters' voice or demonstrations are just not enough to shake the babus.

The heritage is being ravaged by careless civic officers, land grabbers and the illegal encroachers.

What can be more tragic than the fact that we are all witness to this shameless destruction of heritage.

[Photos courtesy, news link as well: Dainik Bhaskar]
[Shaukat Mahal was built during the reign of Nawab Qudsia Begam, as wedding gift for her daughter Nawab Sikandar Jahan Begam]

Ottomon History Archives: Poem by Sultan Murad

SULTAN MURAD III: "WAKE UP O MY EYES FROM HEEDLESSNESS"

This poem have been written by Sultan Murad III who reigned the Ottoman Empire between 1574-1595. One day, Sultan Murad could not wake up for the dawn prayer (fajr) and he felt so sorry and he wrote his famous peom, to state his deep feelings which impressive by itself indeed:

WAKE UP O MY EYES FROM HEEDLESSNESS

Wake up, o my eyes, wake up from heedlessness
Wake up, o my very sleepy eyes, wake up
Azrael's intent is the soul, believe me
Wake up, o my eyes, wake up from heedlessness
Wake up, o my very sleepy eyes, wake up

All birds wake up before dawn
They start reciting God's names in their own tongues
Mountains, rocks and trees declare His unity
Wake up, o my eyes, wake up from heedlessness
Wake up, o my very sleepy eyes, wake up

They open the doors of the heavens
They sprinkle the water of Mercy upon believers
They sew the heaven dress for those waking up at dawn
Wake up, o my eyes, wake up from heedlessness
Wake up, o my very sleepy eyes, wake up

This world is transient, don't ever be deceived
Don't rely on the crown and throne in vanity
Don't feel confident by saying "the seven climates are mine"
Wake up, o my eyes, wake up from heedlessness
Wake up, o my very sleepy eyes, wake up

Forgive me, your servant Murad
Excuse my offenses, abolish my misdeeds
Resurrect me under the Messenger's Flag
Wake up, o my eyes, wake up from heedlessness
Wake up, o my very sleepy eyes, wake up

RAMADAN SERIES: From the Biographies of the Pioneers in Hizb ut Tahrir

#RAMADAN SERIES: From the Biographies of the Pioneers in Hizb ut Tahrir

In recognition and appreciation for the efforts and sacrifices of the early builders from the dawah carriers on the methodology of the Prophethood, the Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir is pleased and honored to publish during the Holy Month of Ramadan for the year 1436 AH - 2015 CE video presentations to hear the biographies of our brothers from the first generation of Hizb ut Tahrir, the pioneers who built and founded the dawah and sacrificed their lives and toiled in their lives to allow the call to the invitation of Khilafah upon the methodology of the Prophethood to reach where it has reached today. This series of interviews has been collected under the title of "From the Pioneers of Hizb ut Tahrir" so stay tuned during the holy month of Ramadan.

Session 1

Tawfeeq Ali Yousuf Al-�Aaridah (Abu Bilal)

Ramadan 1436 AH - June/July 2015 CE

Watch the video here:
http://youtu.be/NR0tWmyNyrw

www.fb.com/HizbTahrirGlobal

Shaykh Abdul Azeez Al-Badry: Struggle of a Martyr

 Allah (�azza wa jal) says:

�Among the believers are men true to what they promised Allah. Among them is he who has fulfilled his vow [to the death], and among them is he who awaits [his chance]. And they did not alter [the terms of their commitment] by any alteration� [Ahzab: 23]

Shaykh Abdul Azeez Al-Badry was a prominent man of knowledge, preacher and political activist in Iraq in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. Having been educated by some of the prominent scholars of Iraq, he was also one of the early and prominent members of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Iraq who struggled in the work for Allah�s deen and gave his life in its cause, murdered by a brutal regime and a martyr (insha Allah) for a great cause.

Early Life, Education and Activism

He was born in the city of Samarra in Iraq in 1929. He grew up in a scholarly environment and received his religious lessons from a range of esteemed scholars of Baghdad, such as Sheikh Amjad Al-Zahawy, Sheikh Muhammad Fu�ad Al-Alusy, Sheikh �Abdul-Qadir Al- Khatib, and others.

He finished his studies and became Imam of the Soor Mosque in 1949 and the Khafafeen Mosque in 1950. He went on to teach and preach at various other mosques in Baghdad over the years to come.

After reading the books of Shaykh Taqiuddin Al Nabhani and meeting with members of Hizb ut-Tahrir, the Shaykh was impressed with the Hizb�s project and in particular its pioneering work in agitating against Arab Socialism at the time. He joined the Hizb�s work in the 1960s in Iraq, becoming a prominent member of its work. He studied directly with Shaykh Taqiuddin Al Nabhani alongside Shaykh Abdul Qadeem Zalloum, who would go on to become the second Ameer of the Hizb after Shaykh Taqi. Shaykh Al-Badry called and worked tirelessly for the establishment of the Khilafah and the implementation of Shariah, and the ideas he held shaped his acts of bravery that were to define the rest of his life.

 

Shaykh Al-Badry with some of his teachers

Intellectual efforts against Arab Socialism/Nationalism and its proponents

The late 1950s and 1960s were defined by the vogue of Arab Socialism, which had taken hold of many countries in the Middle East and had been the discourse many in the region used to articulate an opposition to Western imperialism. Socialism, including its Arab variant, contained many ideas which nonetheless contradicted Islam and this was a cause taken up by several scholars and movements. Among them was Shaykh Al Badry.

Shaykh Al Badry wrote his well-known book The Islamic Rule on Socialism (Hukm al-islam fi al-ishtrakiyah) in which he vehemently attacked the fundamental notions underpinning Socialist thought and refuted the supposed existence of �Socialism within Islam�, a slogan several thinkers and polemicists, as well as Government-sponsored scholars, had taken up as their intellectual cause. The famous Shaykh Amjad Al-Zahawy writes, describing Shaykh Al Badry�s work, that:

Al Badry pointed out that there was no socialism in Islam, and that socialism contravened the holy Islamic law and its principles. This was explained in clear terms, supported by conclusive proof that was beyond any shade of doubt in that they were in full conformity with the unequivocal Shar�iah law. That was done by way of advice to the Muslim Ummah.

A notable example of his courageous work was his response to pro-Government scholars that were sent to him under the auspices of the regime of �Abdul Karim Qaasim, the Iraqi Prime Minister who had overthrown the monarchy of King Faisal II in the 1958coup d��tat. This was done when Shaykh Al Badry was in his first period of house arrest (see below) and such Government scholars proceeded to advise the Shaykh of the �error� of his ways and the error of �involving religion with politics�. In response, the Shaykh wrote the book Islam Between the Scholars and the Rulers (Al-Islam bayn al- �ulama wa al-hukkam). In it he highlighted the deeds of the pious predecessors and great scholars who had stood up to the injustice of oppressors and offered great sacrifices in defence of Islam and Muslims from the early tabi�een (followers of the Companions of the Prophet) to recent times.

His stance on the issue of Palestine

Shaykh Al Badry was a prominent personality of his time and well known not just in circles of scholarship but also by the Governments of the region. Indeed, his activism and awareness of it was not restricted to Iraq, but extended to rulers of the region who knew about his work. Following the capitulation of Arab forces in the 1967 war in the face of Israel, Shaykh Al Badry sent telegrams to all heads of states in the Islamic world, holding them responsible and accusing those who agreed to the cease-fire of being traitors. He formed a delegation of notables that travelled to several Muslim countries, urging Muslim forces to take up their responsibility to defend Palestine.

Following his return to Baghdad after visiting Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Afghanistan and other places, he held an event in which he lamented the way some had restricted the issue of Palestine to being an �Arab issue� as opposed to a broader Muslim issue.

Agitation against Iraqi leadership and rallying popular support

�Abdul Kareem Qassim (ruled 1958-1963)

Among the Shaykh�s most important and telling work was his opposition to the ruler of Iraq, �Abdul Kareem Qaasim, who held office from 1958 to 1963 and who increasingly lent towards the Socialists for support as his rule progressed. Qaasim was responsible for an aggressive, oppressive rule over the country which was characterised by purging those he suspected of being against his agenda from among the people, the scholarly community and the army.

Qaasim infamously had himself labelled �the only master� by his subordinates and attempted to popularise this title among the masses. Shaykh Al Badry, defying this, attacked him in his sermons, leaflets and lectures, calling him instead a �cruel, illegitimate pretender� in the language of the Qur�anic Arabic (Surah Al Qalam: 13). He also used to begin his Friday Khutbah by adding to his salutations the adage �and we seek refuge in Allah from the evils of our rulers�, alluding to Qaasim and the Iraqi regime.

One of the most infamous actions of the Qaasim regime was the execution of notable officers in the Iraqi army who were known for being men of faith and harbouring Islamic sentiments.  They included the likes of Naazim at-Tabqajli and Rifa�t Al-Hajj Sirri, who were hanged.

Shaykh Al-Badry was aggrieved at their execution and led popular demonstrations against Qaasim, including one in which 40,000 people participated, an unprecedented show of support at the time in the face of an extremely violent regime.  The Shaykh openly called for the ousting of Qaasim, and also issued a fatwa declaring the kufr of the Communists who were supporting Qaasim and on whom Qaasim increasingly relied as his original power base (cabinet ministers) shifted towards the pan-Arab Ba�ath Party, which differed with the Communists on several ideological points.

First and second arrests and torture

As a result of these activities, Shaykh al-Badry was put under house arrest for one year from December 1959. As soon as the house arrest was lifted, he continued his work actively. He was arrested once again in July 1961, and then released in December of that year as part of a general amnesty for prisoners due to popular unrest against Qaasim�s regime. During this time he is known to have suffered serious torture and was offered several incentives to abandon his call and instead turn into a supporter of the Qaasim regime, as many scholars had done.

A famous incident: confronting Nadim Al Baytar

Following the 1967 defeat of the Arab states to Israel and the public discourse surrounding it, secularists and socialists on the one hand and Muslim activists on the other attempted to define the causes of military defeat and the ongoing humiliation of Muslims and Arabs. Iraqi secularists invited the Arab-American thinker Nadim Al-Baytar from Canada to give lectures in Iraq. His message emphasized that Muslims� infatuation with bygone Islamic ideals, which he dubbed �invisible� values, was the cause of defeat, and that no victory would be scored over Zionism unless these �invisibles� were totally abandoned in favour of alternative identities and politics.

Prior to Baytar�s most widely advertised lecture (in Baghdad), Sheikh Al-Badry demanded the then President of Iraq �Abdul-Rahman �Arif (ruled from 1966-1968) either allow the Shaykh to give a counter-lecture in the same hall, to allow him to engage in a public debate with him, or to prevent the speaker from giving his lectures. When his requests went unanswered, the Shaykh decided to lead a demonstration on the day the lecture was due to be given. Following the �Asr prayer, the Shaykh lead chants of the takbir and marched from his mosque to the lecture hall followed by many active Muslims. Baytar�s supporters, fearing riots might ensue, evacuated the lecture hall and whisked Baytar on the first flight out of Baghdad.

Final arrest, torture and martyrdom

The Shaykh was arrested once again following relentless activities against the Ba�athists in the June 1969, who by then had been in power for 6 years following their overthrow of Qaasim�s regime in 1963. He was arrested by the intelligence services of Iraq, led by none other than Saddam Hussein himself, who had not yet become outright leader (this would take place de facto in 1976, and formally in 1979). This arrest happened at the behest of the then president of Iraq, Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakr.

The Shaykh was kidnapped late at night as he made his way home. With a precarious security situation and conflict within the Ba�ath Party, Ahmed Al-Bakr and Saddam Hussein sought to minimise political opponents and agitants. Shaykh Al-Badry would be the victim of this grim strategic direction. The Shaykh was taken to one of the notorious prisons in Baghdad where he was tortured severely using the most gruesome of methods.

Some of those who had been detained with the Shaykh and were later released narrated about his time in prison:

The Shaykh was severely tortured, yet he faced that torture a steadfastness and perseverance that exceeded all expectations. The man was proud of his faith and unflinching in adherence to the truth, defying his jailers to the point of death. His fellow detainees used to beg him to keep silent in order to avoid them inflicting more torture upon him, yet he became firmer and prouder of his faith whenever the jailers increased their torture. He never bowed his head to them, nor did he give them any legitimacy or support. He would insist during interrogations that they were agents, lackeys and spies of the colonisers. During the early days of investigations, he raised his hand and hit the chief investigator, Nazim Kazzar, after he insulted him. At that point they beat him everywhere using different means until he fainted, and then they threw him into a cell that had no window and was no more than one meter wide.

During this period of arrest, the Shaykh had his limbs cut alive. The Ba�athist inspired torturers also ripped out his beard, in a mockery to his observance to this part of Islam. They finally proceeded to cut off his tongue, as a retribution for his constantly speaking the truth. He breathed his last during this period of arrest and merciless torture, before had had reached the age of 40.

Funeral: in the esteemed footsteps of Imam Abu Hanifah

 

 His funeral and prayer were conducted at Masjid Imam Abu Hanifah

17 days after his death the Iraqi intelligence left his body in front of his house and told his family that he �died of a heart attack�. They ordered them to bury him without revealing his burial, but word got out and his supporters and family took his body to the Imam Abu Hanifah Mosque in the �Adhamiyyah District of Baghdad, where many could pray for him. The public witnessed the affects of the torture the Shaykh had endured in jail. He was buried in the �Adhamiyyah neighbourhood, close to the tomb of the great Imam Abu Hanifah, may Allah be pleased with them both.

As had the great Imam of Islam�s first school of jurisprudential thought, Shaykh Al-Badry too accounted the ruler and lost his life as a result of injuries sustained as a result of it. And just like him, he too died in jail in the very same city as Imam Abu Hanifah.

Description of him by Shaykh �Abdullah al-�Uqayl

One of the Shaykhs that met him, Shaykh �Abdullah al-�Uqayl, wrote about him thus:

That was Sheikh Al-Badry and that was his fight in the cause of Allah in more than one battlefield where he encountered more than one enemy, but he never flagged, gave in, or flinched from doing so. He would ever be on the front line, proceeding with courage and firmness, inspiring enthusiasm and determination. He stood against all kinds of oppression wherever he found it, bearing the consequence and unafraid of death. He would not run away from a battlefield. In that he was like those men of unflinching resolve in the past and at present�.

His books and an excerpt demonstrating his thinking

The Shaykh, further to his preaching and speaking, was also the author of several important books. All his books were relevant to the struggles of his time and helped create an intellectual response to the ideologies he worked to counter and the complicity of Government �ulema in the condition and apathy of Muslims. As mentioned above, at least two of his books were directly in response to Communism and the pro-Government �ulema. He authored the following books:

�        Islam between the Scholars and the Rulers(Al-Islaam bayn al-�ulamaa wal Hukaam) � a book that has been translated into Urdu and other languages

�        The rule of Islam on Socialism (Hukm al-islam fi al-ishtrakiyah)

�        Islam is the guarantor of the basic needs of the individual

�        The book of God - the eternal Qur'an (Kitab Allahu al-khalid al-qur�an al-karim)

�        Islam is war on Socialist and Capitalism (Al-islam harb ala alishtrakiyah wa al-ra�smaliyah)

The Shaykh�s writings give an insight into his character and personality, and into how he was able to withstand what he did. In his book Islam between the Scholars and the Rulers, he wrote:

It is the will of Allah, Exalted be He, to put his creation to tests to separate between those who are true from those who are false, as he says in Surah Al Ankabut: �Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, �We believe�, and that they will not be tested? We did test those before them, and Allah will certainly know those who are true from those who are false!�

Unjust rulers used to persecute those who opposed their deviant behaviour and resisted their wrong ideas and did not go alone with them in their whims. They used to put them through ordeals after they refused all kinds of rewards the rulers offered them in humiliation and inferiority. But what is it that would cause people of good nature to be lured by money, or hanker after the crumbs of life, or be won over by perishable goods of this life. As for the ordeals, they were prepared for them and bore their brunt with patience, steadfastness, perseverance, and a firm will in anticipation of a reward from Allah in the Hereafter.

This is because they understood well Allah�s statement �Say: �The fire of Hell is fiercer in heat�. If only they could understand� [Al-Tawba: 81] and believed the statement of the Great Creator when he says �And there is the type of man who gives his life to earn the pleasure of Allah. And Allah is full of kindness to His devotees� [Al- Baqara: 207].

The Muslim scholars and Imams who earned the esteem, appreciation and loyalty of people were at the vanguard of those had gone through ordeals and suffered great afflictions, yet they came out victorious and distinguished.

And indeed, he is among those who have earned the esteem, appreciation and loyalty of this ummah, an ummah he strove so hard to revive and help defend against those who would seek to do it harm. May Allah (�azza wa jal) have mercy on Shaykh Al-Badry, include them among the martyrs, and make him an example we seek to emulate.

PART 1: The Marriage between Feminism and Colonialism in the Muslim World

A Historical Perspective

"Anthropology, it has often been said, served as a handmaid to colonialism. Perhaps it must also be said that feminism, or the ideas of feminism, served as its other handmaid."

Leila Ahmed, Egyptian American writer on Feminism in the Muslim World

For over a century there has been an indisputable marriage between feminism and colonialism in the Muslim world that continues into modern times. Successive Western governments and politicians have employed the language of feminism and its movements in order to further their colonial interests in the region. They generated and propagated a narrative that Muslim women needed saving from the 'oppression' of Islamic laws and rule as well as liberating through the Western culture and system. This was in order to morally justify their colonial intervention and wars in the Muslim lands and strengthen their foothold in the region. In truth however, their apparent concern for the wellbeing of Muslim women was feigned emotion, for such intervention worsened the lives of women in the Muslim world and stripped away their rights. An academic, Janine Rich, in an article published in the International Affairs Review entitled, "'Saving' Muslim Women: Feminism, US Policy and the War on Terror" wrote, "The complex discourses surrounding women in the Islamic world have a long and deeply political history, and this narrative has been renewed and re-utilized numerous times to garner widespread public support for Western military intervention in the Middle East. Yet when examined critically, it becomes apparent that U.S. foreign policy and military intervention in the Middle East has both worsened the status of women's rights in the region, and subsequently used the discourse of women's rights as a justification for the "war on terror."

Today, as the concept of the 'Caliphate' is attacked from all sides by Western politicians and media, fear-mongering towards the status of women under Islamic rule has once again intensified. At this time it is perhaps more pertinent than ever to understand that for Western governments, talk of 'Women's Rights' in the context of the Muslim world � both historically and at present times � has only ever been used as a smokescreen and tool to further colonial aims.

The Western Colonial Strategy to Undermine Islamic Rule under the Khilafah:

In the 19th and 20th century, the lust of European powers for expansion of wealth and territory was satisfied through the occupation and colonisation of many Muslim lands, due to their abundant resources and rich revenue potential. Lord Cromer, British Consul-General who ruled over Egypt from 1883 to 1907 stated, "The European would not reside in Egypt unless he could make money by doing so."

However, these powers realized that strengthening and expanding their domination over the region could only be achieved through undermining the political and cultural authority that Islam held within the Muslim world, that was manifested in the presence of Islamic rule under the Khilafah state, alongside replacing it with Western-inclined values, laws and systems. The Western colonial rulers therefore devised a strategy to weaken and ultimately destroy the Khilafah and prevent its future re-establishment; for this state had always stood as the fiercest obstacle to European control of the 'East'. This plan included distancing Muslims intellectually and emotionally from their Islamic beliefs and values and hence re-aligning their loyalties and attachment away from their Deen to the Western secular culture and system. They recognized that the strong adherence of Muslims to their Islamic beliefs and practices carried a potential of the re-emergence of Islam as a powerful political state. This would herald the greatest threat to continued colonial rule in the region and had to be fought at all costs. Hence the European powers employed all means to mould the cultural loyalty of their Muslim subjects towards the West, understanding that this was vital for political loyalty: that cultural colonization held the path to continued physical, political and economic colonization. Lord Cromer for example, viewed by many as the mastermind behind British imperialism in the Arab world, wrote in his book, 'Modern Egypt', "...it is essential that, subsequently to our evacuation, that (Egyptian) government should.....act on principles which will be in conformity with the commonplace requirements of Western civilization.....It is absurd to suppose that Europe will look on as a passive spectator whilst a retrograde government based on purely Muhammadan principles and obsolete oriental ideas, is established in Egypt. The material interests at stake are too important...It is nothing less than this: that the new generation of Egyptians has to be persuaded or forced into imbibing the true spirit of Western Civilization."

The Western Colonialist Attack on "Women and Shariah" to Aid the Destruction of the Khilafah

Reforming the thinking and identity of Muslim women was a primary target in this colonial plan to destroy and prevent Islamic rule, for European powers recognised that in the Islamic society, women were the centre of the family, the heart of communities, and the nurturers of future generations. Hence capturing their minds and hearts would be pivotal in re-shaping the mentality of entire Muslim societies. If they could get Muslim women to despise and reject the Shariah by presenting it as 'the enemy' of the woman, then they could create staunch opponents to Islamic governance within the Muslim world. If they could couple this with enticing them towards the Western identity and system so that they view them as the path to liberation and salvation, then they could also generate strong advocates and ambassadors of Western culture and Western-orientated rule. Christian missionaries also openly advocated targeting the women of the Muslim world due to them being the primary shapers of the thinking and inclinations of the region's children. S. M. Zwemer, a well-known missionary to the Middle East argued, "Owing to the fact that the mother's influence over the children, both boys and girls.....is paramount, and that women are the conservative element in the defence of their faith, we believe that missionary bodies ought to lay far more emphasis in work for Moslem women as a means for hastening the evangelization of Moslem lands."

Therefore, to achieve their goal, the colonialists engineered a specific narrative: that Islam and Islamic rule oppressed women and hence it was their moral duty to save her through removing the cause of her subjugation � the Shariah laws � and to 'civilise' her people through the imposition of Western rule and the Western system. This narrative provided moral justification amongst their own public and those they occupied for their continued colonisation of the Muslim world, also aiding them in their goal of maintaining and strengthening their foothold in the region. Joan Scott in 'The Politics of the Veil' writes regarding France's colonization of Algeria in the 19th century, "From the outset, the violent imposition of French rule was justified in terms of a 'civilizing mission' � the bringing of republican, secular, universalist values to those who lacked them.....the colonizers aimed to assimilate these underdeveloped peoples to French culture."

A host of lies and misinformation was therefore constructed and widely disseminated regarding the position, rights and mistreatment of women under the Shariah. They also promoted the idea that if Muslim women continued to accept the Qur'an and Sunnah as the basis of their beliefs and actions, they would be condemned to oppressed lives. To achieve their aims, colonial rulers also employed the malicious accusations of numerous Western orientalist writers who had over many years conjured up false tales about the mistreatment of women under Islam. Some had even suggested that the backwardness of the Muslim world was due to Islam's degradation of women, and that Muslim societies could only progress towards modernization and civilization if Islam's practices and laws were discarded in exchange for European culture, social customs, and mores. Stanley Lane-Poole for example, the early 20th century British orientalist and archaeologist wrote, "The degradation of women in the East is a canker that begins its destructive work in childhood, and has eaten into the whole system of Islam." Lord Cromer's writings mirror such views. He wrote in his book, 'Modern Egypt', that the reasons, "Islam as a social system has been a complete failure are manifold." However, "first and foremost," he asserts was its treatment of women. He claimed that unlike Christianity that teaches respect for women and causes European men to "elevate" women due to their beliefs, Islam degraded them, and it was due to this degradation, epitomized in 'veiling and segregation of the sexes' that the inferiority of Muslim women could be traced. He wrote that it could not be doubted that 'veiling' exercised, "a baneful effect on Eastern society. The arguments in the case are, indeed, so commonplace that it is unnecessary to dwell on them". He stated that it was essential, "that the new generation of Egyptians has to be persuaded or forced into imbibing the true spirit of western civilization", and to achieve this it was necessary to change the position of women in Islam, for it was Islam's degradation of women through 'veiling' that was "the fatal obstacle" to the Egyptian's, "attainment of that elevation of thought and character which should accompany the introduction of Western civilization", and only by abandoning this could they attain, "the mental and moral development" which he (Cromer) desired for them.

It was clear therefore that to achieve this 'Westernization' of minds, the colonizers sought to dismantle and eliminate any aspect of Islam that prevented them from having control over or access to Muslim women, such as the Islamic family structure of male guardianship over women, the segregation of the sexes, and the Islamic dress. Frantz Fanon, the Afro-French philosopher and writer, commenting regarding French colonialism in Algeria in the 50's, noted, "There is also in the European the crystallization of an aggressiveness, the strain of a kind of violence before the Algerian woman. Unveiling this woman is revealing her beauty; it is baring her secret, breaking her resistance [to colonial rule]. There is in it the will to bring this woman within his reach, to make her a possible object of possession."

Indeed, accusing the Muslim woman's dress of subjugating the woman was an essential part of this colonial project of 'capturing hearts and minds'. As the most visible marker of the difference between Muslim societies and the West, it became a key target of the European onslaught against Islam and came to represent the conflict between the culture of the colonizers and that of the colonized. For example, in the 20th century, in response to an uprising of Algerian Muslims in 1954 aimed at ousting French control of the country, French authorities attempted to maintain their grip over the country by trying to enlist Algerian women to their cause by establishing a network of 'feminine solidarity' centres across the country, run by the wives of the occupation's military officers. The aim was to inculcate Algerian Muslim women with French values and the orientalist narrative on Islam and the Islamic dress in order to win their loyalty to the French cause. The wife of Brigadier General Jacques Massu who led the movement in the capital Algiers once said, "Nourish the mind and the veil will wither by itself". On May 16th, 1958, the women from the organization, accompanied by the French army unveiled a hundred women in a public square. The Muslim women apparently cried, "Let's be like French women" and "Vive L'Alg�rie francaise". It was a symbolic gesture, aimed at propagating further the engineered idea that these 'native' women wished to be set free from their covers and Islam, and that continuing French rule was the means to achieving this. However, later historians have suggested that these unveiled women were impoverished women and maids of the colonial government who were coerced into taking part in this carefully managed event under the threat of losing their jobs if they did not comply. Joan Scott writes in 'The Politics of the Veil', "It (the veil) was the piece of cloth that represented the antithesis of the tricolore, and the failure of the civilizing mission.....For a long time, much longer than the duration of the war of independence, the veil was � for colonized and colonizers alike � an impenetrable membrane, the final barrier to political subjugation."

The issue of 'women' and their status under the Shariah therefore became a centre-piece in the colonial assault against Islamic rule. Indeed it is interesting to note that the European campaign against the Islamic social laws was not undertaken initially by Western feminists � whose influence came only later � but rather by colonial rulers and their administrations. Leila Ahmed, the US Professor on Women's Studies writes in her book 'Women and Gender in Islam' regarding this colonial feminism, "It was here and in the combining of the languages of colonialism and feminism that the fusion between the issues of women and culture was created. More exactly, what was created was the fusion between the issues of women, their oppression, and the cultures of Other men. The idea that Other men, men in colonized societies or societies beyond the borders of the civilized West, oppressed women was to be used, in the rhetoric of colonialism, to render morally justifiable its project of undermining or eradicating the cultures of colonized peoples.....Colonial feminism, or feminism as used against other cultures in the service of colonialism, was shaped into a variety of similar constructs, each tailored to fit the particular culture that was the immediate target of domination � India, the Islamic world, sub-Saharan Africa. With respect to the Islamic world, regarded as an enemy (and indeed as the enemy) since the Crusades, colonialism.....had a rich vein of bigotry and misinformation to draw on."

The Deterioration of the Rights of Muslim Women under Colonial Rule

Whilst European governments employed feminist rhetoric to attack the 'apparent' low status of women in Islam, they cared little about the subjugation of women within their own societies in the West who were denied basic educational, economic, political, and legal rights of citizenship at the time. In fact colonial rulers such as Lord Cromer, who in Egypt adopted the self-appointed role as liberator of Muslim women from their so-called 'oppression' under Islam, while in England was a founding member and one time president of the Men's League that opposed the suffragette movement and their fight for equal legal, political, and economic rights. Indeed, the predominant view within states such as Britain and France during this period was that women were biologically inferior to men in intellect and rationality. Even Western thinkers such as Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, and Montesquieu had described women as incapable by their nature to develop the full faculty of reasoning. They had depicted them as creatures of emotion and therefore unsuitable for the public sphere. Rousseau had argued that the abilities of men and women differed and this is what defined their roles such that men became citizens and women became wives and mothers. Women at the time also lost all legal existence upon marriage, their property and wealth were placed under their husband's authority, and they were denied the right to seek divorce even in an abusive relationship.

In relation to this lowly view and poor treatment of women by European rulers in their own lands, Leila Ahmed writes, "Even as the Victorian male establishment devised theories to contest the claims of feminism, and derided and rejected the ideas of feminism and the notion of men's oppressing women with respect to itself, it captured the language of feminism and redirected it, in the service of colonialism, toward Other men and the cultures of Other men." Therefore, feminism on the Western home front was resisted while exported abroad and used against Islam. It illustrates clearly therefore that all talk of the rights of Muslim women by the European powers was born purely from a colonial will to dominate the Muslim lands rather than any noble altruistic intent to improve the lives of the region's women.

It is therefore not surprising that the rights of Muslim women deteriorated rather than improved under colonial rule. Firstly, European economic penetration into the Muslim world adversely impacted its rural and urban working-class women. European textile imports as an example flooded the Egyptian market, negatively affecting the local textile industry due to competition with the Western goods. Textile production in many of the Muslim lands had for centuries been an area in which women had been employed and able to gain a good income. However, under European economic reforms, countries such as Egypt became mainly an exporter of raw materials such as cotton and an importer of finished European products. This naturally caused a decline in employment, business, and income of those local women involved in the industry. Similarly women in Syria and Aleppo employed within the cotton industry lost their important position within the sector due to imports of European twists and dyes. Other local traders were also affected with local merchants pushed aside due to European companies. Women who invested in local business were therefore also negatively affected.

Secondly, under British colonial occupation of Egypt, the education and training of Muslim girls and women in various fields was minimized hence reducing their possibilities for employment. Lord Cromer as an example placed restrictions on Egyptian government schools and raised school fees which naturally held back girls education. He also discouraged the training of female doctors, closing down the School of Hakimas that had given women as many years of medical training as men received in the School of Medicine, restricting it to midwifery. He argued, "I am aware that in exceptional cases women like to be attended by female doctors, but I conceive that throughout the civilized world, attendance by medical men is still the rule". Additionally, the colonizers introduced British women into the labour force of Egypt in the fields of education and healthcare. This reduced the employment opportunities of Muslim women in these sectors while simultaneously increasing the dependence of the colonized on their colonizers for teachers and medical care.

Thirdly, the imposition of British laws upon the Muslim world, stripped women in the region of their rights ordained by the Shariah that they had enjoyed under Islamic rule. Noah Feldman, a law professor at Harvard University, wrote in a 2008 edition of The New York Times Magazine, regarding 'The implementation of Shariah', "As for sexism, the common law (of European countries) long denied married women any property rights or indeed legal personality apart from their husbands. When the British applied their law to Muslims in place of Shariah, as they did in some colonies, the result was to strip married women of the property that Islamic law had always granted them".

All this clearly illustrates that the historical attack on the Islamic social laws and the status of women in the Shariah by European politicians and governments had no association whatsoever with furthering the call for women's rights. Neither did it bear any relation to the true problems facing Muslim women at the time. It was unequivocally driven purely upon securing colonial political interests in the Muslim world. The accusation that Islam and Islamic rule oppressed women while the Western secular system liberated them from subjugation was therefore nothing but a false, deceitful, self-seeking narrative born from a colonial will to dominate the region. Present day attacks against 'Women and the Shariah' by Western politicians, governments and institutions are replicating this same strategy.

Written for The Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir by

Dr. Nazreen Nawaz

Member of the Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir