Channel: Abu Abdissalam
© No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever. Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate. We are working on a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system.
smilla rahmanir rahim al hamdu Lillahi Rabbil alameen wa salli wa sallim wa ala mon voice rajmata Lil alameen wa ala alihi wa sahbihi h mine, a Salaam Alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh barakato.
When we read the news, or watch the TV,
we see the murder of innocent civilians, mostly Muslim civilians around the world.
And we see
many Muslims, weak, oppressed, old women and children being slaughtered around the world.
And then we find that the perpetrators of these war crimes are portrayed as upholders of justice and truth.
in the same
channel, in the same papers, you will find that Muslims are portrayed as extremists, because of our different values.
So we are told who to take our religion from. We are told who is moderate, we are told who is the extremist among Muslims.
And no doubt, this media plays a huge role in a war that is at least perceived to be against Islam.
But the media war is nothing new. It's not new to this time. It's not new to this place. It's not new at all. In fact, if we go back to the time of the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam,
you find that he was attacked very severely by a very hostile media media of that time. In fact, in the very first proclamation to the Quraysh, you find a very negative response. The Prophet Mohammed sly Selim, as you all know, he goes to the mountain.
And he calls the nobles of his family. And he asks them a simple question.
He says, If I was to tell you about an army
that was behind this mountain
that was preparing to attack you, would you believe me? They said, Yes, of course, you've never lied.
He said, then I am a warner. I'm a messenger of Allah, sent to you as a warner of a severe torment. Immediately, the media machine of that time, began its work. Abu lahab started by saying tobon luck, may you perish. And indeed, this was the family from among the family of the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.
Subsequently, the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was accused of many, many things. He was accused of being a sorcerer. He was accused of being a madman, he was accused of being a magician. He was accused of being a liar. He was accused of being possessed. He was accused of dazzling people with his poetry of being a poet. He was accused of splitting people up father and son, mother and daughter, husband and wife.
In fact, they went further and they attacked his followers. They attacked them on the basis that only the poor people followed him. The oppressed ones, the slave ones, the backward ones. They said, We are the nobles, the nobles don't follow him. The intellectuals of that time, they don't follow him. So they use even world events to attack the message of La ilaha illAllah Muhammad Rasul Allah.
They looked at the war that was happening between the two powers of that time, a mushrik, pagan nation who had no scripture, the Persians on the one hand, who are supported by the Quraysh of Makkah, versus the Romans, the Christian kingdom.
The Christian Empire, the Romans, those who had a scripture, and they use this event where the Persians initially won the first war.
To say, look, we are upon the truth. The people who don't have this scripture, they are the ones who are upon the truth. The Muslims, of course, they wanted the Christians to win that war.
Likewise, the event of ultimate Raj,
and its raw Mirage, when the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam,
he told the people imagine this, in a scenario in a circumstance where or in a context where people are very hostile to Islam, they want any excuse to point fingers and point holes in this new founded religion
for the time,
and Mohammed, even Abdullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, he now claims that he's gone to Jerusalem and back when one night
What a strange thing.
And they took this the media of that time.
They use this to ridicule the people. Do you believe in this madman? It takes us months to go to Jerusalem. And he claims he's gone to Jerusalem and come back in one night.
But what was the response of the believers of that time?
Some of them they oppose stated, and this is the nature of such tests, when the going gets tough
when they can't handle
what's happening in the media pressure, some of them apostates from Islam,
but the majority of them and from at the forefront, forefront of them was the great and noble, Abubakar Siddique or the Allahu taala. And who, who said, I believe in something greater. I believe that he gets revelation from above the heavens every night. Subhan Allah, that's much greater than just going to Jerusalem and back in one night.
They brought Ayat of the Quran and come rulings to criticize this religion of Islam.
They took the idea, the notion that is no longer allowed in Islam, to eat meat that has been that hasn't been slaughtered. In other words, the carrion the dead meat caucus that hasn't been slaughtered, is haram. When this law came into enforcement in Islam, or when it came down the Quraysh
they took they mocked the Muslims. And look at the arguments that they brought. They brought the intellectual arguments of that time. They said, look at this meat, the meat that you eat is the meat that you slaughter.
As for the meat that is dead, alive is the one who killed that meat. Allah is the one that killed these animals. And you don't eat this meat. But the meat that you kill you eat that meat only. So they try to confuse the Muslims try to pick holes in,
in the Islamic law,
in Ayat of the Quran, in a Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, and this is nothing new. Another example is when the Kabbalah was changed from from Jerusalem, from a beta a beta map to this to Makkah, the Quraysh and the people they said what turn them away from their old dibella and they started to try and cause doubts among the Muslims.
When the Prophet sallallahu Sallam was in battle, you find the mushriks would start spreading rumors, rumors that were baseless, unfounded, but it would spread in the media of that time. The people of that time would spread the rumors that Prophet Mohammed sly Salim has been killed. Why? to demoralize the Muslims to lesser their morale. This is all part of the media strategy against Islam. You had rumors concocted by the hypocrite Abdullah bin or babe and saloon against the very family of the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam I shot the Allahu anhu was accused of the filthy crime that she was accused of, not the on love on her.
So therefore called
attacks against Islam is not something new, they are not something new. It is something that started right from the inception of prophethood, or the inception of messenger ship when the Prophet sallallahu Sallam was ordered to proclaim His message to the rest of the people.
The poets in the poets of Quraysh, they would actually recite poetry attacking the Muslims and Islam. And at that time, the Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu Sallam would order the Muslim poets to respond to that poetry to respond. The media of the Muslims, was asked to respond to that to those accusations.
So this is something there is no issue in Islam, except that people will attack it. And this will continue until yom Okayama. It's a fact. And there's nothing different today.
We see them. We see people criticizing a cloth, a bit of cloth and niqab. We find that at one time, it was called the people who wore this cloth. This veil, were called oppressed, they were oppressed.
But then as time went on, it kind of evolved into the same people that were oppressed, are now no longer oppressed. They're extremists. They're violent. They're portrayed with guns, and rifles in their hands when they are described in the media.
So the same people that were oppressed 15 years ago, they were portrayed as being oppressed and weak, are now being portrayed as extremist and violent extremists that
they say it's a mark of separation.
The veil is a mark of separation.
And what is really disappointing is how few Muslims stood up and said, yes, it is a mark of separation. That's the very point of the veil. It is a mark of separation between men and women, our men, and our women don't even mix. It is a mark of separation.
They point fingers at the Sharia law, such that the word Sharia
the fact that in Islam, we have seen the Sharia law in place. And it was a golden age, a golden period, where crime was next to nothing.
When the Sharia was actually enforced,
people could walk around with freedom, you didn't have the widespread rapes or stealing murder every single day when we switch on the news, we hear about a murder, a knife crime, a rape a this or that every single day to day.
But when we have historical proof, we have enacted that when the Sharia was applied in the Islamic world, you didn't have this kind of this kind of filth, and these kind of crimes being committed at such a wide or at such a huge level.
Are we saying as Muslims, that we want Sharia law to be applied in the UK? Yes, of course. Of course, we believe that it is the supreme, just system and way of life. In fact, the Archbishop of Canterbury, he wanted parts of the Bible to be implemented in the daily lives of people in the UK.
But do we want to shove it down people's throats? No. Do we want to force it down people's throats? Of course not. But what we're asking for is dialogue. What we're asking for is discussion. What we're asking for is to look and compare, have a look at these systems. Don't just brand it all with a paintbrush. That's what we're asking for as Muslims.
So the objective of the Sharia law is not to cut off people's hands. It's not to stone people to death. In fact, even taymiyah Rahim Allah, the great scholar who died 728 years after the higit of the Prophet sallallahu sallam, he said
between the time of the Prophet sallallahu sallam, until today, not a single person has been stoned to death for adultery based on the four witnesses.
He was only ever based on a person's own admission, never
an Everest, they mean, Rahim Allah, a scholar who died about 10 years ago, he says, and we say, between even taneous time and today, not a single person has been killed based on four witnesses stoned to death.
So what's the point?
The point, the primary point behind this is prevention is as a deterrent. We don't want people's hands to be chopped off, but you have a system in place. When you have this God consciousness, when you have the whole system in place,
then you won't have the kind of crimes that you have today. And that is what we as Muslims are arguing about. That is what we are talking about. We're not just talking about randomly killing people, or we're not talking about randomly chopping off people's hands, we're talking about discussion, dialogue on a proper intellectual level.
But because of this great media pressure, because of the pressure, at the time of Mirage, when people are poor stated and got confused, because of the pressure of today, when what we hear in the media, we find the same thing happening today that Muslims who have been affected by these doubts, and they have started to call for opinions, which are totally alien to Islam. So it begs the question, who really speaks for Islam? What is Islam? Can anybody just talk about anything, and it suddenly becomes Islam?
Well, there are a number of issues that I think are important to mention. The first
is those issues, which Muslims have united upon, they have been upon the same way of thinking and practice, generation after generation since the time of the Prophet sallallahu sallam, in other words, an EMA a consensus
when and upon these issues when the Muslims united, even if it's at a previous time, it is not possible to come with another opinion and then claim that this is from Islam.
So generation upon generation, the Muslims have agreed that hey, job is an obligation.
Generation upon generation scholars and layperson alike have agreed that Adam did not come from parents, he didn't come from monkeys or apes or anything of that nature. Generation upon generation, they agreed on the obligation of applying Islamic law in an Islamic State.
Generation upon generation, they believed these things. So when you have
when you have this agreement, generation upon generation, it is not permissible. It is not possible to come with another opinion. And then say claim that this is from Islam, not possible. Because the Prophet of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said, My Ummah will never unite upon misguidance never. So when the oma unites upon something, it is not possible for that thing to be wrong, because the Prophet sallallahu Sallam said, My oma will never unite upon misguidance in another Hadith, my own mo will never unite, except upon the truth.
So if the Prophet of Allah salallahu alayhi wa sallam who is the primary representative of Islam, is telling us that anything that goes against what the oma has united upon is not
Islam, then nobody 14 centuries later can come and say this is Islam.
So when the oma has united about Riba interest usually being Haram, generation after generation, it's not possible for somebody to come later and say that it is actually holiday.
Likewise, if there was a disagreement among scholars of the past, of issues that were well known and
For example, let's say the scholars had two opinions, or three opinions. If they had three opinions, it is not possible. It is not allowed for us to come with a fourth opinion for an issue that was well known at the time of the early Muslims. You can't come with a fourth opinion. Why? Because among the oma, let's look at it logically, among the Ummah, they have united, that it is not that fourth opinion.
So therefore, they will agree that the truth lies between these three opinions.
But by implicit understanding, that means they agree that anything outside of these three opinions is not representative of Islam or the truth. This is a second type of issue. The third type of issue is the new issues,
traveling by car using a microphone using television, all of these things, then in these matters, there may be some difference of opinion, which are, which is allowed. And the scholars of that time can debate and discuss and the council's can come with rulings for those matters. But the matters that we really want to focus on other first and the second types of matters, because it is haram and is impossible, it is unlawful for somebody to come and claim that anything that the oma has already united upon previously to now come and then go against a previous ajumma or a previous consensus of the scholars of the oma
so what is what are we supposed to do? We should remember that no doubt the media is going to be against Islam. It's a fact.
And this will continue until yarmulke Yama, we should be careful about what we relate to others. We should also remember very clearly
that the rulings of Islam have profound wisdoms, and sometimes those wisdoms we may know about, and sometimes we don't know, the wisdoms, for example.
If you think about the stoning to death of an adulterer, many people, they can't understand this ruling in Islam.
And in fact, I was once speaking to a non Muslim about this, and he was saying how barbaric This is.
And I said,
I explained that actually, in Islam, for somebody to be stoned to death, you need four witnesses. And those four just witnesses have to see the act of penetration. That pen going in the ink as they say, they have to see this and in the time of Ahmad Al Khattab radi Allahu anhu.
four witnesses came forward accusing someone of adultery. Three of them said we saw the act of penetration. The fourth one, he said I saw a man on top of woman and he went into a bit more detail but he had not seen the act of penetration.
What did not happen Al Khattab radi Allahu anhu do, he lashed the witnesses? Why, because we are told that we are not even allowed to speak about this thing without for just witnesses who see the act of penetration. When I explained this, to this non Muslim, he said to me, what if somebody does that in front of four people he deserves to be stoned to death.
So, the point is sometimes we may not understand wisdoms of certain rulings, but when we actually think about it, when we ponder over it as the scholars and look at the wisdom then inshallah we will come to understanding the wisdoms and the conditions and what have you with regards to these rulings.
But we should not be ashamed of our religion, we should not be ashamed, because there is a very important principle here. And that principle comes back
to a very important point, and that is that the Quran, if we believe that it is the word of Allah, then everything that is in the Quran is from Allah, it is divine, and therefore it is the truth, the whole truth and absolute truth.
ever taught me No, no, Baba blade keytab you attack fotona bebout Do you believe in part of the book and leave part
The book on law criticizes those who take part of the book and reject the other part. Just because we may not understand parts of certain rulings, it shouldn't mean that we reject those rulings. It should mean that we can't, you know, hold to that remember what worker, the one who said, I believe in something much greater than that. I believe that revelation comes to him from above the heavens every single night.
And this is a test. This is our test. today. This is our test. How will we respond to the accusations against Islam? Either, we can go away, learn about our religion, learn about the wisdoms behind the rulings of our religion, or we can be swept away in this media backlash. Rather, we should be ambassadors of Islam, we should learn about our religion and be able to portray it and relate to others in a way that they can understand that Islam was truly sent as a mercy to the whole world was on the Lahore selama Baraka Island Nabina Muhammad Ali, he was happy he changes Hello Clara as salaam alaikum