Death of Mandela or death of Imaan?

It is perhaps more a statement of my own arrogance and weak spiritual condition, instead of that of others, that I often react with incredulity to some people’s views. Is that not obvious? Do they not know what the Qurān says? How can they believe that?

These reactions of mine display a lack of patience far from the Sunnah. If Allāh has granted me some understanding of His Speech and that of His Rasūl  صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم , I should be patient enough to explain to those who have drawn their own conclusions as opposed to drawing guidance from Allāh and His Rasūl صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم , but really, it is so difficult! On the other hand, those who have knowledge, and deliberately distort Allāh’s Word for their own material gain, are no better than Jewish Pharisees in my eyes. In fact they are worse. They have been admitted into the best Ummah and have knowledge of the best scripture and yet walk in the footsteps of Rabbis.

Reaction to the death of Nelson Mandela

Since the death of Nelson Mandela, I am overcome with grief, not at his death, but at the dangerous reaction from certain quarters. Rather than mourn over Mandela. I grieve over statements from Muslims which contradict the Qurān they are supposed to follow, and to put it lightly, such contradictions surely have a negative effect on one’s Īmān.

Muslims have been texting messages such as:

·         May Allāh grant him Jannatul Firdaws.

·         May Allāh accept his good and forgive him.

·         May he rest in peace.

·         Etc.

Moreover, a South African politician not only sings his praises at the Jumu‘ah platform, but expects the ‘Ulamā to toe his line.

But what is Allāh’s reaction?

Allāh’s reaction is known. I earnestly beg all Muslims who have held an opinion contrary to the Word of Allāh to sincerely and immediately repent. How possibly can any of the above statements and praising one who died denying Allāh be at all justified when Allāh says:

إن الذين كفروا وماتوا وهم كفار أولئك عليهم لعنة الله والملائكة والناس أجمعين. خالدين فيها لا يخفف عنهم العذاب ولا هم ينظرون

Verily those who disbelieved and died as disbelievers then upon such be the curse of Allāh, the angels and all mankind. May they be forever in it [the curse or Hell]. Punishment will not be lightened for them and they will not be granted respite. [al-Baqarah: 161-2]

Allāh is clear that:

·         Those who die as disbelievers are under His curse.

·         The angels also curse him.

·         As opposed to the politician who said that what happens in the grave is not under discussion, only the good of Mandela, the rest of mankind who submit their opinions to Allāh curse those who die denying him. According to al-Imām al-Baghawī, the disbeliever will even curse himself.

·         Unlike a believer who can hope for eventual release, the disbeliever is punished forever. Allāh makes no distinction how good or bad he was.

·         There is no lightening of the punishment.

·         It is continuous with no respite. 

How possibly does a slave then utter words contrary to the decree of Allāh? Such a slave must surely be unaware of what Allāh says, and will repent when he learns the truth. No doubt.      

Good deeds of disbelievers – Abū Ṭālib

Good deeds? Is there anyone on the face of the earth who can match the deeds of Abū Ṭālib who raised the orphan boy, Muḥammad bin ‘Abdillāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم , as if he were his own son since the age of 8? Which Muslim, living or dead, can claim to have a deed equal Abū Ṭālib’s protecting Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  for a decade when the Quraysh opposed him? These are not good deeds, these are GREAT deeds. Add to this that Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  loved him most intensely. The Qurān even testifies to the sadness of Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  that his beloved uncle never embraced Islām:

إنك لا تهدي من أحببت ولكن الله يهدي من يشاء وهو أعلم بالمهتدين

Verily you do not guide those whom you love, but it is Allāh who guides whom He wills. He knows best those deserving to receive guidance. [al-Qaṣaṣ: 56]

Yet when he died, Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  clearly said that he is to be in Hell. If good deeds were sufficient, then Abū Tālib would be destined for Jannah, not Hell. Let alone Mandela, the most pious of Muslims cannot match either his service to Islām, or the love Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  had for him. Yet he is condemned to eternal damnation.

Muṭ‘īm bin ‘Adī & Ibn Jad‘ān

Muṭ‘im bin ‘Adī was a distant uncle of Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم . Every Muslim should learn at least two of his amazing and unmatchable deeds:

·         When Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم   was exiled into the Glen of Abū Tālib and starved there for three years, Muṭ‘im bin ‘Adī helped terminate the boycott.

·         When the people of aṭ-Ṭāif brutally stoned Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم   and he had no physical refuge, it was Muṭ‘im bin ‘Adī who protected Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  and allowed him to return to Makkah. 

Were I to live a million years, I would never be able to match either deed. Yet I thank Allāh for granting me Īmān, for despite my paucity of deeds and profusion of sin, I am an Ummatī of Muḥammad صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  unlike the disbeliever, Muṭ‘im bin ‘Adī. 

‘Abdullāh bin Jad‘ān was legendary for his generosity and nobility of character. In fact, before Islām, Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  joined him in assisting  a trader who had been cheated by a prominent man of Makkah. Sadly today there are Muslim traders who are cheats. On one occasion alone, Ibn Jad‘ān imported 2000 camel-loads of wheat, honey and butter from Syria, not for trade, but he publicly invited all and sundry to come and eat from his food. 

Again, I cannot match his one donation throughout my life, but what does Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  say about him? Al-Imām Muslim narrates:

عن عائشة قالت قلت يا رسول الله ابن جدعان كان في الجاهلية يصل الرحم ويطعم المسكين فهل ذاك نافعه قال لا ينفعه إنه لم يقل يوما رب اغفر لي خطيئتي يوم الدين

 ‘Aishah said, “O Rasulullāh! In the pagan time Ibn Jad‘ān used to maintain family ties and feed the poor. Will that benefit him?”

“No,” he replied, “For he never said, even a single day, ‘O my Rabb, forgive my sin on the Day of Reckoning.’”

I would further point out that the Muḥaddith, al-Imām an-Nawawī, labelled this Ḥadīth under, “Proof that good deeds do not benefit one who dies upon disbelief.” Some of us hold al-Imām an-Nawawī in greater regard than what we hold the politician who praises one who dies upon disbelief, at Jumu‘ah.

Condoling with disbelievers

Our neighbours have rights over us, even if they reject Allāh. This is what Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  taught us. Consoling them during their grief is but good character and fulfilling their right. This is not what I dispute. I dispute extending “good wishes” to the extent that we contradict the Qurān. I dispute praising a disbeliever in the house of Allāh.

Praising a disbeliever in the Masjid

The Masjid is established for the remembrance and praise of Allāh:

في بيوت أذن الله أن ترفع ويذكر فيها اسمه يسبح له فيها بالغدو والآصال

In houses which Allāh has commanded be erected and wherein His Name is mentioned and He is praised in them morning and evening. [an-Nūr: 36]

Allāh dislikes the praising of a sinner. Abū Ya‘lā, Ibn Ḥajar, Abū Nu‘aym and al-Bayhaqī record the Ḥadith narrated by Anas رضي الله عنه :

عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ ، قَالَ : قَالَ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : " إِذَا مُدِحَ الْفَاسِقُ اهْتَزَّ لِذَلِكَ الْعَرْشُ ، وَغَضِبَ لَهُ الرَّبُّ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ

When an open sinner is praised the Throne shakes at that and Allāh Most Mighty and Majestic becomes angry. 

How much more serious is it when the praise is in the Masjid, and how much worse than a sinner is one who died rejecting Allāh? The ploy that Islām acknowledges the achievements of disbelievers is only viable to those who cannot distinguish between a simple record of history and singing someone’s praise. Every Ḥadīth of Abū Ṭālib is a simple unbiased record of fact, whether that he did good, or that he is eternally condemned. Is there a single authentic narration of Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  singing his uncle’s praises after he died? Rather there is proof that that would have angered Allāh.

Is Islām compromised still Islām?

If the above gives the impression that I am advocating a hard-line hostile attitude to disbelievers, then I apologise, that was not my intention. By all means let us show the character of Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  to them. We should condole, and a simple statement of acknowledging the historical record of a person’s deeds might also be in order, in a given context. Let us however pause and draw a breath, to ask ourselves if we have not overstepped the bounds when we offer opinions which contradict the Qurān. There might be scope in differing presentations when dealing with them, but if we compromise basic principles to appease disbelievers, where is the line drawn? Is the eventual product after compromise and yet more compromise still Islām?

سليمان الكندي

Presenting the Quran & rational thought to Saudi apologists

Merriam-Webster defines Apologetics as:

 

1

:  systematic argumentative discourse in defense (as of a doctrine)

2

:  a branch of theology devoted to the defense of the divine origin and authority of Christianity

 

 

Amongst the Muslim community, there are those who defend the Saudi regime as if defending their religion or a doctrine. These apologists either have financial interests in doing so, or at the very least, subconsciously seek to soothe their hidden guilt at allowing an anti-Islāmic force to rule the sacred soil of Arabia. They are not bothered at the broader issues and crises of Islām as long as they can continue their lifestyle as they please.

 

 

The arguments they present are patently naïve and never refer to the Qurān or Ḥadīth, for indeed the sacred texts of Islām cannot condone the existence of a tyrannical, treasonous regime devoted to Ghayrullāh. To even call these arguments “apologetics” is a kindness, for apologetics is defined to be “systematic,” unlike the statements of Saudi apologists.

 

1.    The excesses of the Saudis are to be balanced against their great service to the Muslims

 

 

Okay, so the Saudis have made the Maṭāf marble when previously Ṭawāf was more physically taxing. They have installed air-conditioning and many other material amenities. This is not in dispute. What I do dispute is firstly, this argument presents nothing of a scriptural basis. It is pure concocted defence. Secondly the defence is invalid.

 

 

• The apologists pretend that the Saudis have spent of their own personal wealth in the cause of Allāh and deserve recognition for this supposed selfless sacrifice. How many minutes of honest labour have the Saudis engaged in and how many millilitres of sweat have they perspired to acquire this wealth of “theirs”?  Unless the apologists wish to stoop to unheard of levels of shamelessness, nobody is able to deny the fact that the thousands of Saudis who call themselves princes are nothing but parasites leeching off the wealth of Allāh and the Ummah. When they do engage in work, it is in the fields of drug trafficking, stealing property from commoners, taking loans and not repaying and the like.


• When the Jews offer the Palestinians some scraps of amenities, we are not impressed, and rightfully so. The wealth is stolen and if a portion is thrown back, why should the victim show gratitude? What is the difference between Jewish and Saudi theft?


• The amounts spent on the Ḥaramayn should be weighed against the mind boggling billions which the House of Saud lavishes not just on extravagant lifestyles, palaces and yachts, but Allāh alone knows the incalculable amount spent on gambling and prostitution. Consider just two facts – ABC reported in 2004 how Saudi princes paid prostitutes of both sexes in the French  Riviera up to $50,000 per session; and consider that in 1969, i.e. just two years after the loss of al-Aqṣā, Fahd gambled 5.6m USD away in a single night. Adjust that to current values and ask with what face do the apologists ask us to be grateful to this house?


• Even if the wealth came from the personal funds and generosity of the Saudis, I would advise the apologists to read the Qurān, at least once in a while. Remember that Pharaoh had raised Mūsā ‘alayhis salām since he was a baby. He not only paid for his food, clothing and the roof over his head, even the mother’s milk which Mūsā ‘alayhis salām drank was not for free. Pharaoh paid his mother to breast-feed him. The Qurān describes how the now Nabī Mūsā ‘alayhis salām denounces the shirk and tyranny of Pharaoh. Pharaoh responds in the same vein as the apologists and reminds Mūsā ‘alayhis salām of his past generosity to him. I shall limit myself to quoting the reply of Mūsā ‘alayhis salām. If an explanation is needed on comparing the two scenarios then may Allāh have mercy!

 

وتلك نعمة تمنها علي أن عبدت بني إسرائيل

And that is the favour which you flaunt against me despite your enslaving Banū Isrāīl? [ash-Shuara: 22]

2.    If Allāh was unhappy with the Saudis He would not allow them control over the Ka ‘bah

 

If not for the fact that I have heard this argument many a time, I would feel it a sheer waste of time to even respond to it.

 

• Three centuries before Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه و سلم  ‘Amr bin Luḥayy al-Khuzā‘ī ruled Makkah. It was this wretched person who defiled the Ka‘bah and introduced idolatry to Makkah. According to the Saudi apologists, control of the Ka‘bah is indicative of Allāh’s sanctioning a ruling. By this reasoning, Allāh sanctioned the rule of ‘Amr and the idolators for the next three centuries. Note that the Saudis have not yet completed a century of ruling Makkah, as opposed to the three centuries of idolatrous rule. If we extend the strange reasoning of the apologists, this would mean that Allāh is triply more pleased with the idolaters than with the Saudis.


• Again, if Allāh is pleased with whoever rules Makkah, what was the purpose of Rasūlullāh militarily صلى الله عليه و سلم opposing the government of Makkah and conquering Makkah?


•  During the Islāmic period Makkah has been ruled several times by the Shī‘ah. These included the Qarāmatīyah and Fāṭimīyah, both whom subscribed to Ismā‘īlī heresy i.e. ‘Alī رضى الله عنه is God incarnate! So… was Allāh pleased with these governments?


• Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه و سلم  has informed us that Ẓū Suwayqatayn will conquer Makkah and demolish the Ka‘bah. Indeed, by the reasoning of the Saudi apologists, Allāh’s pleasure not only encompasses pious rulers such as  Abū Bakr رضى الله عنه, but a host of tyrants and disbelievers who have ruled and will rule Makkah.


• I again ask the apologists to refer to the Word of Allāh. Al-‘Abbās رضى الله عنه  is honoured as both a Ṣaḥābī and uncle of Rasūlullāh  صلى الله عليه و سلم  , notwithstanding his relative late entry into Islām. In fact he fought on the Quraysh side at Badr. He held a post in the Quraysh government and could be termed as the Minister of Ḥajj and Custodian of al-Masjid al-Ḥarām. He defended his perceived honour in regards the early Muslims by saying, “You may have preceded us in Islām, Hijrah and Jihād, but indeed we maintained the building of al-Masjid al-Ḥarām and gave water to the pilgrims and spent on the needy.” Allāh’s reply in the form of the 19^th verse of at-Tawbah should be well heeded by those who defend the House of Saud:

 

أجعلتم سقاية الحاج وعمارة المسجد الحرام كمن آمن بالله واليوم الآخر وجاهد في سبيل الله لا يستوون عند الله والله لا يهدي القوم الظالمين

Do you make the giving of water to the pilgrims and building the Sacred Masjid equal to those who believe in Allāh and the Last Day and strive in Allāh’s way? They are not equal in the Sight of Allāh! And Allāh does not guide the wrong-doing folk.

 

Although the scum of kufr seems to be overwhelming the pure river of Islām, inshāllāh Allāh’s Dīn will soon triumph. Islām’s triumph is guaranteed, Allāh alone knows when. The question each Muslim should ask, is whether he or she wishes to sell his or her religion and associate with the scum for the sake of temporary worldly pleasure, or whether he or she wishes to be amongst Allāh’s party. May Allāh guide us all.

Presenting the Quran & rational thought to Saudi apologists

Merriam-Webster defines Apologetics as:

1

:  systematic argumentative discourse in defense (as of a doctrine)

2

:  a branch of theology devoted to the defense of the divine origin and authority of Christianity

Amongst the Muslim community, there are those who defend the Saudi regime as if defending their religion or a doctrine. These apologists either have financial interests in doing so, or at the very least, subconsciously seek to soothe their hidden guilt at allowing an anti-Islāmic force to rule the sacred soil of Arabia. They are not bothered at the broader issues and crises of Islām as long as they can continue their lifestyle as they please.

The arguments they present are patently naïve and never refer to the Qurān or Ḥadīth, for indeed the sacred texts of Islām cannot condone the existence of a tyrannical, treasonous regime devoted to Ghayrullāh. To even call these arguments “apologetics” is a kindness, for apologetics is defined to be “systematic,” unlike the statements of Saudi apologists. 

   "The excesses of the Saudis are to be balanced against their great service to the Muslims"

Okay, so the Saudis have made the Maṭāf marble when previously Ṭawāf was more physically taxing. They have installed air-conditioning and many other material amenities. This is not in dispute. What I do dispute is firstly, this argument presents nothing of a scriptural basis. It is pure concocted defence. Secondly the defence is invalid.

·         The apologists pretend that the Saudis have spent of their own personal wealth in the cause of Allāh and deserve recognition for this supposed selfless sacrifice. How many minutes of honest labour have the Saudis engaged in and how many millilitres of sweat have they perspired to acquire this wealth of “theirs”?  Unless the apologists wish to stoop to unheard of levels of shamelessness, nobody is able to deny the fact that the thousands of Saudis who call themselves princes are nothing but parasites leeching off the wealth of Allāh and the Ummah. When they do engage in work, it is in the fields of drug trafficking, stealing property from commoners, taking loans and not repaying and the like.

·         When the Jews offer the Palestinians some scraps of amenities, we are not impressed, and rightfully so. The wealth is stolen and if a portion is thrown back, why should the victim show gratitude? What is the difference between Jewish and Saudi theft?

·         The amounts spent on the Ḥaramayn should be weighed against the mind boggling billions which the House of Saud lavishes not just on extravagant lifestyles, palaces and yachts, but Allāh alone knows the incalculable amount spent on gambling and prostitution. Consider just two facts – ABC reported in 2004 how Saudi princes paid prostitutes of both sexes in the French  Riviera up to $50,000 per session; and consider that in 1969, i.e. just two years after the loss of al-Aqṣā, Fahd gambled 5.6m USD away in a single night. Adjust that to current values and ask with what face do the apologists ask us to be grateful to this house?

·         Even if the wealth came from the personal funds and generosity of the Saudis, I would advise the apologists to read the Qurān, at least once in a while. Remember that Pharaoh had raised Mūsā ‘alayhis salām since he was a baby. He not only paid for his food, clothing and the roof over his head, even the mother’s milk which Mūsā ‘alayhis salām drank was not for free. Pharaoh paid his mother to breast-feed him. The Qurān describes how the now Nabī Mūsā ‘alayhis salām denounces the shirk and tyranny of Pharaoh. Pharaoh responds in the same vein as the apologists and reminds Mūsā ‘alayhis salām of his past generosity to him. I shall limit myself to quoting the reply of Mūsā ‘alayhis salām. If an explanation is needed on comparing the two scenarios then may Allāh have mercy!

وتلك نعمة تمنها علي أن عبدت بني إسرائيل

And that is the favour which you flaunt against me despite your enslaving Banū Isrāīl? [ash-Shuara: 22]

"If Allāh was unhappy with the Saudis He would not allow them control over the Ka ‘bah"

If not for the fact that I have heard this argument many a time, I would feel it a sheer waste of time to even respond to it.

·         Three centuries before Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه و سلم  ‘Amr bin Luḥayy al-Khuzā‘ī ruled Makkah. It was this wretched person who defiled the Ka‘bah and introduced idolatry to Makkah. According to the Saudi apologists, control of the Ka‘bah is indicative of Allāh’s sanctioning a ruling. By this reasoning, Allāh sanctioned the rule of ‘Amr and the idolators for the next three centuries. Note that the Saudis have not yet completed a century of ruling Makkah, as opposed to the three centuries of idolatrous rule. If we extend the strange reasoning of the apologists, this would mean that Allāh is triply more pleased with the idolaters than with the Saudis.

·         Again, if Allāh is pleased with whoever rules Makkah, what was the purpose of Rasūlullāh militarily صلى الله عليه و سلم opposing the government of Makkah and conquering Makkah?

·          During the Islāmic period Makkah has been ruled several times by the Shī‘ah. These included the Qarāmatīyah and Fāṭimīyah, both whom subscribed to Ismā‘īlī heresy i.e. ‘Alī رضى الله عنه is God incarnate! So… was Allāh pleased with these governments?

·         Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه و سلم  has informed us that Ẓū Suwayqatayn will conquer Makkah and demolish the Ka‘bah. Indeed, by the reasoning of the Saudi apologists, Allāh’s pleasure not only encompasses pious rulers such as  Abū Bakr رضى الله عنه, but a host of tyrants and disbelievers who have ruled and will rule Makkah.

·         I again ask the apologists to refer to the Word of Allāh. Al-‘Abbās رضى الله عنه  is honoured as both a Ṣaḥābī and uncle of Rasūlullāh  صلى الله عليه و سلم  , notwithstanding his relative late entry into Islām. In fact he fought on the Quraysh side at Badr. He held a post in the Quraysh government and could be termed as the Minister of Ḥajj and Custodian of al-Masjid al-Ḥarām. He defended his perceived honour in regards the early Muslims by saying, “You may have preceded us in Islām, Hijrah and Jihād, but indeed we maintained the building of al-Masjid al-Ḥarām and gave water to the pilgrims and spent on the needy.” Allāh’s reply in the form of the 19^th verse of at-Tawbah should be well heeded by those who defend the House of Saud:

أجعلتم سقاية الحاج وعمارة المسجد الحرام كمن آمن بالله واليوم الآخر وجاهد في سبيل الله لا يستوون عند الله والله لا يهدي القوم الظالمين

Do you make the giving of water to the pilgrims and building the Sacred Masjid equal to those who believe in Allāh and the Last Day and strive in Allāh’s way? They are not equal in the Sight of Allāh! And Allāh does not guide the wrong-doing folk.

Although the scum of kufr seems to be overwhelming the pure river of Islām, inshāllāh Allāh’s Dīn will soon triumph. Islām’s triumph is guaranteed, Allāh alone knows when. The question each Muslim should ask, is whether he or she wishes to sell his or her religion and associate with the scum for the sake of temporary worldly pleasure, or whether he or she wishes to be amongst Allāh’s party. May Allāh guide us all.

سليمان الكندي

Expel not just the Jews but the Saudis from Arabia

 

 

عن عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه قال : قال رسول الله صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم : لأخرجنَّ اليهود والنصارى من جزيرة العرب حتى لا أدع إلا مسلماً  أخرجه مسلم

‘Umar bin al-Khaṭṭāb رضي الله عنهnarrates that Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  said, “Indeed I shall expel the Jews and the Christians from the Arabian Peninsula, to the extent that I shall leave none but a Muslim [therein].” [Muslim]

From the narration of al-Imām Aḥmad we know that that was the final wish and instruction of Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  unto this Ummah. For centuries the Ummah observed this instruction, which was uttered during the final illness its Nabī صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم . The Rawāfiḍ [Shī‘ah] may have betrayed Islām many a time, for example, they aligned with the Crusaders against the Muslims, however, we should be honest and pay credit where it is due. This much we should credit them with, that they never had the audacity to spit on the final command of Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  the way the Satanic Saudi regime does. The Rawāfiḍ never invited the Christian and Jewish armies to trample Arabian soil.

Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  set the Arabian Peninsula aside as the pure home of Islām and the Oneness of Allāh. It was on Arabia’s sacred soil that Jibrīl descended and revealed the Qurān. Allāh sent his best angels to the soil of Badr in Arabia. As if hosting the Ka‘bah and Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  were not sufficient honour to the land of Arabia, Arabia should surely praise Allāh for every footstep of the Companions  of Muḥammad صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  which Allāh allowed to be set on her soil.

Today, instead of armies of angels, the Dajjāl armies of America trample sacred Arabian soil. Those who declare Allāh to be one, languish in prisons in the holy land, whilst those who deny Him are feted with honour. Do they not know that all honour belongs to Allāh? Weep O Muslims, if you can, for through your complacency prostitutes now walk in the land where once the wives of the Nabī صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  travelled. Does it bother you at all that the flag of disbelief arrogantly flutters in the land where once the Ṣāḥābah died defending the banner of Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم ?

Those who dare claim to be the servants and custodians of the Ḥaramayn have spat at the command of Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم . The heart of every Muslim should bleed at the thought that we are the first generation to witness those who claim to be Muslims violating the final command of Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم , a command which he uttered in a state of great weakness and pain. Let us honestly ask ourselves which insult causes Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم greater grief, the accursed idolater, ‘Uqbah bin Abī Mueet physically spitting on Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم , or his supposed followers spitting on his final command?  Is it only a command which has been spat at, or is it, in our apathy to the final illness and pain of Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم , as if we have joined ‘Uqbah and spat at Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  himself?

Those who sell their religion for a paltry material gain, defend the Saudi Satanic regime and offer excuses which they in their hearts know to be worthless lies. In regards the above Ḥadīth, for example, they say:

1.       The command is directed at terminating the political power of the Jews and Christians in Arabia, not expelling them.

2.        The command is directed at Muslim governors and commanders for implementation, not the public at large.

It does not require much brain capacity to perceive the fallacy and contradictions of the above.

1.       Is the Ḥadīth specifically against the Jews and Christians having power in Arabia? Well the House of Saud brings them into Arabia with full military might, and creates autonomous American camps where Sharī‘ah is but a mocked word. How exactly is this terminating their power in Arabia?

2.       If the Ḥadīth does not intend the expulsion of the Jews, why use the word لأخرجنَّ  “I shall certainly expel” or أخرجوا  “expel” – command form?

3.       If the purpose is solely termination of political power, why the addition of, “…, to the extent that I shall leave none but a Muslim [therein].”

4.       The House of Saud demands that ordinary Muslims abstain from this Ḥadīth, as it only concerns commanders and governors. We can agree to that, but we should also ask, why then are those in command and government of Arabia defying the Ḥadīth?

The point has long been reached where the crimes of the Saudi regime against Allāh and His Rasūl صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  cannot be deemed as singular incidents to be discussed in isolation. The crimes of the regime are a systematic policy against Islām, and necessitate the regime’s removal. May Allāh grant that we witness that day just as we have witnessed the humiliation of our religion.