There are those who say that Hizb ut Tahrir depends on the period of Mecca in its quest for the establishment of the Khilafah and not on the period of Medina. It views material action, i.e. “Jihad” in the stage of calling for the establishment of the Khilafah as a violation of the Shari’ah, because the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم has not done so… The questioner adds: Why is the evidence of the establishment of the Khilafah not taken from the Medinese period, where Jihad was valid and applied? Is there a clear-cut sufficient answer to the issue?
Wa jazak Allahu khairan.
Within this question lie several matters that require explanation:
1. The relevant evidence, whether from the Book or from the Sunnah, must be followed comprehensively, and there is no difference between the evidence emerging in Mecca al-Mukarrameh and the evidence emerging in the Medina al-Munawwarah.
2. The required evidence is one that pertains to the issue, rather than evidence that does not pertain to the matter:
a. For example, if I wanted to know how to perform ablution, I would search for evidence pertaining to ablution, whether revealed in Mecca or in Medina. The ruling is then extracted from the evidence according to the established legal (Shar’ii) methodology… But I would not research evidence on fasting to extract from it the ruling of ablution and its modalities.
b. As another example, if I wanted to know the provisions of Hajj, I would start searching for evidence pertaining to Hajj, whether revealed in Mecca or in Medina, and from it the ruling is extracted according to the established legal (Shar’ii) methodology. I would not research the evidence of prayer to extract from it the provisions of Hajj and its modalities.
c. As a further example, if I wanted to know the provisions of Jihad: Whether as an individual or as a collective obligation, whether defensive or aggressive, what pertains to Jihad from the provisions of conquests and spreading Islam, whether the conquest takes place by force or through conciliation… I would research the evidence on Jihad wherever it is to be found, whether revealed in Mecca or in Medina, and the ruling is extracted from it according to the established legal methodology. But I would not research the evidence on Zakat to take from it the ruling of Jihad and its details.
d. This is the modus operandi in every issue, the evidence is researched whether revealed in Mecca or in Medina, and from this evidence the Shar’i ruling of the issue is taken according to the established legal methodology.
3. Now we come to the issue of establishing an Islamic state, and we search for its evidence, whether revealed in Mecca or in Medina, and extract the Shar’i ruling according to the established legal methodology.
We do not find any evidence to establish an Islamic state, except that which was presented by the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم in his Seerah in the Holy City of Mecca. He called to Islam secretly, then forming a believing, steadfast block…then he announced it among the people in Mecca and its surroundings…then seeking support from the people of power and strength. Eventually Allah showed mercy to him صلى الله عليه وسلم through the Ansar, so the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم emigrated to them and set up the state.
This is the evidence of the establishment of the State, and there is no other evidence. The Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم showed it to us in his Seerah through clear-cut evidence, and we have to commit to it. The issue is not one of the Meccan period before the imposition of Jihad, or the Medinese period after the imposition of Jihad. Rather it is a research for evidence pertaining to the establishment of the State, which is only to be found in Mecca until the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم migrated to Medina and established the State.
It is one matter while Jihad is a different matter. As we said, the evidence on the establishment of the State is taken from its precedents, and the evidence on Jihad is taken from its precedence, and they are different and independent from each other. Therefore Jihad is not suspended in the absence of the Khilafah state, because the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم says:
«وَالْجِهَادُ مَاضٍ مُنْذُ بَعَثَنِي اللهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ إِلَى أَنْ يُقَاتِلَ آخِرُ أُمَّتِي الدَّجَّالَ، لَا يُبْطِلُهُ جَوْرُ جَائِرٍ وَلَا عَدْلُ عَادِلٍ»
“Jihad is ongoing since Allah Almighty sent me until the last of my Ummah will fight the Dajjal, neither the injustice of an oppressor nor the justice of a righteous will suspend it.” [Reported by al-Bayhaqi in as-Sunan al-Kubra from Anas Bin Malik]
Therefore, Jihad is ongoing within the framework of its Shar’i provisions, whether the Khilafah has been established or not.
And the work for the establishment of the Khilafah is not suspended because the rulers suspended Jihad. The work for the Khilafah goes on until it is established, because it is prohibited for the Muslims who are able to, that there shall be no Bay’ah to a Khaleefah in their necks. Muslim narrated from Abdullah Bin Umar who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم say:
«مَنْ خَلَعَ يَدًا مِنْ طَاعَةٍ، لَقِيَ اللهَ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ لَا حُجَّةَ لَهُ، وَمَنْ مَاتَ وَلَيْسَ فِي عُنُقِهِ بَيْعَةٌ، مَاتَ مِيتَةً جَاهِلِيَّةً»
“Who withdrew his hand from obedience will meet Allah on the day of resurrection without an argument for himself, and who died without a Bay’ah in his neck, died the death of Jahiliyah.”
Hence Jihad is ongoing, and the work for the Khilafah continues until it is established, none of them depends on the other, they are two different issues. For each issue its Shar’i evidence is sought, and from it the ruling specific to the matter is extracted according to the established legal methodology.
4. Therefore commitment of the Hizb to the method of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم as he demonstrated in Mecca until he established the state in Medina, and the non-use of hostilities during the phase of calling for the establishment of the Khilafah, have nothing to do with the Meccan or the Medinese period. Rather there is no evidence on the establishing the State except for what the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم demonstrated in Mecca until it was established in Medina. Therefore the issue is the method of the establishment of the state, but there is no other method except what the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم demonstrated in his Seerah in Mecca.
If the issue was the work of the Islamic State and its institutions… then we had taken it from the evidence demonstrated by the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم in Medina, because the State was established there.
A. The provisions on any matter are taken from the evidence that pertains to this matter, whether revealed in Mecca or Medina. Such that the provisions of fasting are taking from the evidence on fasting, and the provisions of prayer are taken from the evidence on prayer, and the provisions of Jihad are taken from the evidence on Jihad as well as the provisions of the establishment of the State are taken from the evidence on establishing the State…and so on.
B. The commitment to the method of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in Mecca for the establishment of the State stems from the fact that there is no other evidence on the establishment of the State except that which was demonstrated in the Holy City of Mecca. Had there been evidence on the establishment of the State originating in Medina, then this evidence too would have been made a source of research.
We ask Allah Almighty’s help and success for the establishment of an Islamic state, a rightly guided Khilafah that restores honor in Islam and Muslims, and humiliates Kufr and Kuffar, such that goodness prevails throughout the world, and that is beloved to Allah.