Bismillahi Wal Hamdullillah Was Salaatu Was Salaamu ‘Alaa Rasoolillah
Under Point 2 The Document mentions:
02: THERE IN NO SUCH THING AS MODERATE OR RADICAL OR EXTREME ISLAM
Under this point he begins with the statement:
“The terms extremist, moderate, terrorist, radical etc… have no place in Islam whatsoever.”
He also claims: “..These terms have been introduced into the vocabulary by the British regime and the media in order to isolate Muslims who practice their deen and thereafter to demonize them and eventually to bring in laws to silence them hoping that the other Muslims will not speak up in their defence..”
This statement of his is again either one of ignorance concerning the statements of Allah and his Messenger (May Peace Be Upon Him), or a continuation of the ongoing fabrications we see coming from this man and his group.
Regardless of how these terms are used by the Non-Muslims, it is falsehood to reject the fact that these concepts have been mentioned in the Book and the Sunnah. If Anjem is ignorant of the presence of these affairs in the book and Sunnah, then he has no place speaking on behalf of any Muslim until he learns the religion (or perhaps he is working with the previous principle of his ‘anyone of them (the Muslims) may represent them all!’) or he knows of them, and he intentionally hides that which is in the book and the Sunnah, which is a worse calamity!
Allah mentions in the Qur’aan
“Thus have we make you a balanced nation (i.e. moderate) that you may be witnesses over mankind”
(Suratul Baqarah Vs 143)
The Messenger (May Peace Be Upon Him) also said:
“Be aware of extremism (Al Ghuloo) for indeed those who came before you were destroyed by extremism”
(Sunan An Nasaa’ie Hadeeth No. 3057)
Thus we clearly have references to extremism and moderation in Islamic text. We have the encouragement with one, and a warning against the other.
As far as the term ‘Terrorist’ then, while the issue of striking terror in the heart of the enemy during ‘legislated’ and ‘legitimate’ warfare is a desired affair among all nations, to use murder, kidnapping and other such methods as a means for change, political or otherwise, is the evil path of the first of the innovators who appeared within this Ummah, those who assassinated Ali Radhiyallahu Anhu, the khawaarij. Thus the Scholars of Ahlus Sunnah consider the terms ‘Irhaab/Irhaabi’ (Terrorism/Terrorist) as accepted terms referring to a well known group of individuals.
Shaikh Abdul Azeez Ibn Baaz mentions: “At-Tattarruf (Extremism) is (a methodology based upon) taking (innovated) allowances that have no legitimate substantiation and no evidence supporting them. Terrorism is that one attacks or kills individuals without right or evidence, in fact upon ignorance and devoid of insight. They then, are referred to as ‘Terrorists’ (Irhaabiyoon), those who kill people without right and without shariah proof. They affect the security of the people and cause problems between then and within their country, they are Terrorists.
(From the tape: Verdicts of the scholars concerning Jihaad and Suicide missions and terrorism)
In this section we see other examples of Choudhurys ignorant generalisations. He states:
“The Messenger (May Peace Be Upon Him) Muhammad (saw) said: “Whatever is not based upon my teachings will be rejected”
Again here we see an example of his untrustworthiness in narration, if he cannot be trusted when narrating from the Messenger of Allah (May Peace Be Upon Him) then he undoubtedly will be even less trustworthy with the speech of anyone else!
The Messenger (May Peace Be Upon Him) said in the hadeeth of Aisha:
“Whoever brings about in this affair of ours that which is not from it then it will be rejected”
(Collected by Bukhaari and Muslim) And in a variant narration:
“Whoever carries out an action in this affair of ours that is not from it will have it rejected”
(Collected by Muslim)
These two narrations are the closest authentic hadeeths carrying that which resembles the meaning of the text that Choudhury has quoted. No doubt though, we observe that the meanings of the authentic narrations revolve around innovations ‘in the religion’ while the wording Choudhury sites is broader and encompasses much more than the actual hadeeth.
The authentic hadeeth mentions specifies the issues of religion, while his version would appear to carry the meaning that there is nothing that may be carried out by the Muslim at all, unless there is text to substantiate it. While this is true as it relates to acts of worship and issues of belief, it does not hold true in relation to worldly affairs. The principle that our scholars mention regularly is that the worldly affairs are all permissible unless there are clear-cut texts prohibiting a particular action. This principle they base upon the statement of Allah the most high:
“It is he who has created for you all that is on the earth” (Suratul Baqarah Vs 29)
And other such texts which indicate that Allah has given us these things to enjoy as we will, as long as we do not partake in prohibited matters.
It is important then that we observe well, the inaccuracies we observe in this document, since they form the basis of much of their warped view and extreme methodology as we will go on to see inshallah.