This is an excerpt (edited - only parts relevant to HT retained) from the Sheykh's post on the question of Khilafa.
Source: http://www.anwar-alawlaki.com/?p=44
...can you give me your views on Hizb ut-Tahrir. JazakAllah Khair. Salam
Alakum.
Answer:
Most Islamic groups that were founded after the fall of the khilafa recognize the importance of re-establishing al khilafa again. There was a time during the decades of the eighties and nineties when the Salafi’s, Ikhwaan, Jamaat Islami, HT, Jihad groups and even some of the sufi’s talked about khilafah. Since then and because of the fact that the West has made it clear that it doesn’t like that idea and would not tolerate it, some groups have backed off completely from any talk of khilafah while others toned it down. Only a few remained steadfast in their call to establish the Islamic system again.
The proposed methods that Islamic groups presented for re-establishing al Khilafah are:
...
3. The HT method of raising the awareness of the ummah of the importance of khilafa, educating the Muslims on politics, and searching for nusrah.
...
Regarding the method of HT which you specifically referred to in your question, I first came in contact with HT members from Jordan in the early nineties and found them to be argumentative but well-mannered and polite. My first understanding of the Hizb was from them and they were core members of the group. HT has played an important role in raising the awareness of the ummah to the matter of khilafa. They also played a role in countering the false idea that politics and political awareness have nothing to do with Islam. However the method of HT to re-establish khilfah is simply not going to work. To wait for nusrah until it arrives is to wait for a miracle. Tribes or military generals that are supposed to give nusrah and establish the religion of Allah are not going to be won over simply by discussions. They will only be won over when they see a group of believers living by what they say and sacrifice all that they own for the sake of Allah. This is what will inspire others to join. The two success stories of powerful people giving nusrah to the religion are some of the former officers of the Iraqi baath regime who joined the insurgency and the former president of Chechnya, Dudayev, who was a high ranking officer in the Soviet army. Both these successful examples of nusra were not won over through debates, demonstrations and pamphlets but by them seeing a living example of men struggling in the path of Allah.
I recommend you read the whole thing, as there are over 160 comments, some of them actually worth reading, as well as the article as a whole is an interesting viewpoint. While not necessarily agreeing with the Sheikh on all points made, its a good read...
7 comments:
In the West, wouldn't be a good idea for Muslims to support pro-nuclear-energy campaigns? Two reasons:
1) The more electricity Europe generates using nuclear reactors, the less gas it will need to buy from Gazprom, and therefore the less money the Butchers of Chechnya will have to spend on their war machine.
("Renewable" energy sources such as wind turbines are non-solutions as they are so unreliable that they must be backed up by gas. Former German chancellor Gerhard Schröder introduced a nuclear phase-out in Germany, and heavily promoted "renewables". Gazprom rewarded him to the tune of half a million euros a year.)
2. With enough nuclear reactors you could not just generate electricity, but also manufacture artificial petrol and diesel for transportation. If the West no longer needs Middle East oil, that's the strongest argument for Western imperialism in the Middle East shoved into the dustbin of history...
I can definately see your point, although there is one important consideration here - if Europe and US were to divest themselves completely of their chronical reliance on Middle Eastern (and Russian/Iranian etc) oil,the oil producing countries would suffer a major economic downturn which can potentially lead to a major societal revolution. Fancy that...
Yes, the "what about the oil-producing countries" is a worry for me, but on the other hand this problem will have to be dealt with some time or other. After all, the oil won't last forever and it is far better to set up a nuclear-dominated energy infrastructure before we are running critically short of fossil fuels.
Oh, and I think the best kind of nuclear reactor for future use would be the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor.
Oh, and another point - I think that all nuclear power stations ought to do something useful with their waste heat, instead of just dumping it.
Colder countries could use this heat for district heating, while warm countries could use it to desalinate water. Using fossil fuels for desalination (as is currently done in most Middle Eastern countries) is criminally wasteful in my view.
Personally, I am waiting for the thermonuclear reactor :) Once the plasma is subdued, we should have pretty much limitless energy... Until of course we convert it into a bomb and kill each other...
I think developing the LFTR (or other breeder fission reactors) would be much easier than getting fusion working - I view fusion as a 22nd century technology.
As for wars, my hope is that limitless energy would put an end to the scarcities that are the driving force behind almost all wars.
Limitless energy may turn out to be the key to a never-ending war. One never knows with such things...
Post a Comment