e) Who are the benefit seekers?
For the Muslims in the UK, which includes HT, the reality is, they are living a relatively comfortable life under the authority of non-Muslims. Most of us are honest enough to recognise our weakness, and admit that we are here because of economic reasons. So nobody is in a position lecture others about benefit. It is part of human nature to seek benefit.
(Yusuf) Is it permissible to live here?
(Yamin) Yes, but why should you live here when the Muslim countries are ONLY suitable for the Caliphate? So why are you here supporting a democracy that spawns other democracies in the world? The reason why the majority of Muslims are here is because of benefit. So nobody should be lecturing others about benefit.
(Yusuf) I am here because my father moved here in 1963. The benefit being talked about is placing the interests over and above the hukm shar’I. Please stick to the substantive discussion rather than deal with the peripherals.
(Yusuf) Is it incumbent on all Muslims to refer to the hukm Shar’I?
(Yamin) Strange question out of the blue – Yes it is. And?
(Yusuf) This part of the work of HTB, this contextualises the election discussion.
(Yusuf) Is it one of the acts of goodness to enjoin the ma’ruf and forbid the munkar?
(Yamin) Yes it is – again what has this got to do with my points here?
(Yusuf) This is why the discussion about voting is addressed with the Muslim community. It is not about lecturing but about engaging with the Muslim community so they can assess whether to vote or not based upon the hukm shar’I.
(Yusuf) Benefit is acceptable as a reality construct as long as it does not contradict the hukm shar’I and each of us will be accountable for our deeds.
(Yamin) But it contradicts in your case as it does, you should be in a Muslim country trying to alter the system there.
(Yamin) Yes, and I never implied otherwise.
(Yusuf) I was commenting on your claim about lecturing Muslims about benefit in its generic sense? As you should know benefit in HT parlance is a criterion which sidelines the ahkaam shar’iah for personal interests.
Even if you are born here, you can migrate. Nick Griffin or the UKIP would happily pay for your ticket with some pocket money to move. If HT members are so eager to implement Sharia laws, they should have all migrated to Afghanistan when the Taliban seized power in the early years. The argument that they did not want to implement Islam fully is a poor excuse, they did what was in their ability, if you wanted to go the extra mile, and then logically you should have migrated there and offered full support to achieve that. At least you would have had some experience. The truth is nobody wanted to trade for the streets of London, Sydney, New York, Toronto, for the muddy streets of Kabul!
(Yusuf) It is not right for you to muddy the waters by questioning anyone’s sincerity or to bolster arguments by personalising matters. Even when the khilafah is re-established, bi iznillah, it would not automatically become incumbent to move if engaged in da’wah.
On an aside, the Taliban never claimed they established khilafah, they declared an imarah for the people of Afghanistan, that is why HT sent a delegation to verify this and to give bay’ah upon khilafah, just as the Chechens sent a delegation for this purpose.
(Yamin) You are not answering my point. Even if the Taliban were not perfect, you should have all moved there as they were already on that mode of implementing the Sharia Laws. You make it sound as though the Taliban were another secular regime!
(Yusuf) Please brother, there is a law against such a great number of exclamation marks (if there isn’t there should be J). I have answered your points, but if you have the ability to gaze inside other people’s hearts, you have an awesome gift. Do not look down upon your brothers.
The fard of establishing the khilafah is not fulfilled based upon working towards something, it is fulfilled when Islam is comprehensively established and an imarah is established for all Muslims. The Taliban established their imarah based upon the corruption around them, they saw it as an internal matter and never intended that this represented Muslims that were not of Afghani extraction.
(Yamin) The use of exclamation mark is a bad habit on my part. I tend to use it even when I don’t mean to. You have not answered the points with honesty. Your father, like mine moved here in the 60s, but none of us are compelled to live here, and if we both were really that keen to implement the Sharia laws, we would move to somewhere like Afghanistan. Note I say “we” and not “you” – that is not looking down at anyone, but reminding your and your members, that “we” are all in the same boat of seekers of benefit in the West. So your members should be cautious in waving the benefit card against the pro voters. If they peaked under your cover they could find plenty of materials to show how many of them pursue materialist interests; and in fact we all do as human beings.
We have a weakness, we are living here as migrant community trying to survive and protect our interests; it is not good to beat your chest here, and then run to the dole office asking for benefit. I know Sharia gives you that right to seek that, but one day you may find that right has gone, as you want to remain spectators here by disengaging from the legislative process.