A Rejoinder to: Fiqh for Minorities - A Source methodology and Framework Approach part 3
Fiqh for Minorities: A Source Methodology and
Framework Approach by Mufti Muḥammad Haffejee was presented at the Southern African
Ulama Conference, Eswatini [30 September 2022 – 2 October 2022].
The objective of the paper was covered in part 1 of
the rejoinder. Part 2 of the rejoinder covered the sources of the ideas of new
terms to be employed in Fiqh Al-Aqalliyāt. In part 3, clarity will be provided
on the incident of the Noble Ṣaḥābah raḍiyallāhu ‘anhum who migrated to Habasha,
and their blessed biographies will, Inshā Allāh, be purified from
misrepresentation and the slander directed towards them.
At the outset, it seems odd, or, co-incidental, or,
convenient to notice the trend amongst advocates for Fiqh for Minorities to
quote the incident of Habasha for their cowardly attempt to scuttle and subvert
the Sharī’ah.
Mufti Muḥammad Haffejee has employed his own Ijtihād,
or has copied and pasted the Ijtihād of others, like Taha Jabir Al-Alwani to
establish that Muslim Minorities should give due consideration to non-Muslim
rulers who afford safety and privilege to Muslims.
Should Muslim minorities show due
consideration to any and every ruler who has some Muslims living
safely in his country? Is that all that is required? In that case, Muslims must
“show due consideration” to the Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom, France,
USA, China, India, and even Israel. This is despite their hostility to Islām
and the Muslims, in addition to their war crimes. After all, they all have at
least some Muslim citizens in their countries who are afforded “equal rights.”
The Mufti is guilty of committing what is
termed in Classical Fiqh as Qiyās ma’al Fāriq.
Added to the above, does the Mufti not
realise that many, if not most, Muslims who are living in non-Muslim countries
are doing so as a direct result of colonialism and the destruction of their
homelands by these very countries wherein they currently reside?[1]
Has the Mufti bought into the Fir’awnī narrative, where the oppressor does all
types of oppression and then still counts the few “favours” that he offers? By
this kind of talk, the Mufti helps to whitewash Western colonialism.
To quell any difference of opinion, the Mufti
states that we should not fall prey to naïve referencing to
the past, without taking into consideration modern factors and the lived
reality of the 21st century.
As a rejoinder to this, it has become
apparent that the Mufti has not understood his own references regarding the
past, nor did he fully grasp the modern era and its challenges. One who
compares the rulers of post-colonial democracies to the King of Ḥabasha should
be grateful if he is called nothing more than naïve. If there is anything we
should not fall prey to, it is this kind of shallow scholarship. This kind of
scholarship will offer nothing genuine, pure or authentic. It will only squash
(and damage in the process) Islāmic teachings to fit the frame of all the un-Islāmic
ways of the disbelievers.
The Mufti also correctly highlighted the
resilience of the Ṣaḥābah raḍiyallāhu ‘anhum. However, he did not expound sufficiently upon the most important lesson
in the incident for Muslims in non-Muslim lands, i.e., the no-compromise
attitude of the Ṣaḥābah raḍiyallāhu ‘anhum. They firstly went against the diplomatic norm of the country by refusing
to bow. They gave preference to the law of Allāh Ta’ālā over the law of the
land. As for the greeting they adopted, this was not “an alternative chosen”,
as the Mufti claims. Rather, this was also from the teachings of Rasūlullāh ṣallallāhu
‘alayhi wa sallam.
The next point of reference in the story to
highlight their no-compromise attitude – which the Mufti may not have seen or
chose to ignore – was the statement of Sayyidunā Ja’far raḍiyallāhu ‘anhu. When
the Ṣaḥābah raḍiyallāhu ‘anhum were summoned,
they had a small discussion as to what should be said and what should not be
said. They boldly committed to state only the plain truth and the unadulterated
teachings of Rasūlullāh ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, irrespective of what the
outcome may be. We call on the Mufti to adopt this approach, as it truly
reflects the biography and the way of the Noble Ṣaḥābah raḍiyallāhu
‘anhum.
The advocates for Fiqh for Minorities
must, at all cost, present examples of the kind of interfaith activities that
they propose the Ṣaḥābah raḍiyallāhu ‘anhum engaged in. If they cannot, and
will not, then they must seek forgiveness from Allāh Ta’ālā for their slander
against the blessed companions of Rasūlullāh ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
We ask Mufti Muḥammad Haffejee to
present a holistic overview of all the incidents that resemble the incident of
Habasha, where the blessed Ṣaḥābah raḍiyallāhu ‘anhum went to the courts of
kings and rulers.
In the battle between truth and
falsehood, the numerical minority is of no essence. The Muslims during the
initial years of Islām were a numerical minority and they were happy over the
fact that they were amongst the few who embraced the faith early on. They would
recount to others that they were for example, the fifth, the seventh, or the
fortieth to embrace Islām and adhered to it wholeheartedly for life.
How
many a small company has overcome a large company by permission of Allāh. And
Allāh is with the patient.[1]
We hope in the mercy of Allāh Ta’ālā for acceptance
and protection from every form of harm or loss.
[1] The same can be said about once Muslim
countries that have become non-Muslim states, e.g. India.
