The mentioned talk is about what the establishment of Sharia means: https://youtu.be/5HsU7SAMmRE Personal Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/EyadQunaibi ===== Twitter account https://twitter.com/Dr_EyadQun
Peace be upon you and the mercy of God. Dear brothers, the goal of this talk is to build awareness and clarify the goal that Muslims should strive to achieve, with a focus on warning against exploiting events to normalize with moderate democracy and secularism that corrupts the Muslims' worldly life and the hereafter.
The topic is complex, so I will start with somewhat lengthy but very important introductions to untangle the issues and establish a common ground before reaching the main topic. I believe this will greatly facilitate our agreement and guidance to the truth by the permission of God the Most High.
Let me start with matters we agree upon:
On the other hand, there is an egalitarian secularism, which claims to stand at an equal distance from everyone, and allows everyone to practice their religious rites. The adherents of this secularism may adhere to Islamic ethics and rites in themselves, but they are committed to not adopting Islam as a single dominant reference for legislation and all aspects of life, but rather they determine their references for governance through democracy that does not contradict the secularism of the state.
Now, let me set aside matters we will not discuss in order to focus on what is more important:
The main topic is: addressing the dilemma in the minds of some regarding secularism and democracy that harms them religiously and worldly.
The most dangerous aspect of the topic, dear brothers, is the normalization of democracy and egalitarian secularism by praising and accepting them as a final model. Over the years, the goal was clear: "the Muslim state that establishes the law of God the Most High," but the proposition has changed now.
It is now said: "We do not claim the ability to establish the Sharia, but we reduce the evils," then it turns into reaching "egalitarian secularism" as a goal in itself that is celebrated and considered a significant victory, a clear opening, and a model to be emulated!
This flaw is evident in statements made by writers and preachers, such as some saying: "Let us be realistic, the dreams of an Islamic state are unrealistic, we want secularism like Erdogan's secularism." Another says: "What do you want with an Islamic state? Justice? Here is justice and equality in Turkey." They say this in complete ignorance of the meaning of the Islamic system, and that justice and truth are only achieved by the Sharia of the Lord of the Worlds.
People eagerly circulate articles claiming that Erdogan replaced Ataturkism with "neutral secularism" so that the state stands at an equal distance from religions. Some claim that "Islam does not need a government that adopts it and laws that impose it, as much as it needs a just system of governance that does not practice discrimination against it."
Here we ask: What is the definition of justice? If egalitarian secularism accepts sectarianism and submission to a positive system, then the true religion does not accept that. There is nothing called "equal distance"; Islam either dominates or is nullified, for its nature does not accept subjugation: {It is He who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to prevail it over all religions even if the polytheists hate it}.
Egalitarian secularism allows the practice of some "rites," but it criminalizes those who call for the dominance of Sharia and consider it the sole reference. This is what we warn against: that this model becomes the ultimate goal, and it is thought that Islam does not need a state to protect it.
Now someone will say: "But my brother, Erdogan cannot impose the dominance of Islam." I say to you: Our subject is not the person Erdogan; I am talking about praising egalitarian secularism as a methodology.
Another will say: "But my brother, how do you want to impose Islam on a state that includes Muslims, Christians, and others? It is not just to impose your vision on others." Ah! This is my point; that your statement nullifies the Islam you claim to belong to from its foundation, because you do not see it fit as a system of governance and see others better than it.
And God the Most High said: {Do they seek the judgment of ignorance? And who is better in judgment than God for a people who have certainty.} And God the Most High commanded the expansion of the rule of Islam so that there is no fitnah: {And fight them until there is no fitnah and the religion is all for God.} And this is how the Messenger of God ﷺ and the Muslims after him acted throughout the centuries.
The Islamic system of governance is a system of truth and justice in which Muslims and others are treated justly. Saying, "We are not able to establish this system" is one thing, and saying, "That its establishment is not just and that egalitarian secularism is the solution" is a completely different thing.
Another article published on Al Jazeera by a well-known writer, overflowing with praise for democracy. Among his statements: "The whole world has witnessed with enthusiasm and interest a radiant democratic path in Turkey." He then said, "Now, we must focus on building a permissive democracy that accommodates all components of society without ideological extremism or coercive bias."
Does the pursuit of Islamic dominance with its justice for all constitute "ideological extremism"? Is it "permissive democracy" that we must build? The writer says, "As the Arab peoples aspiring to freedom and democracy still see in Turkey a good example to follow, a light that inspires hope."
So, let efforts be exerted, let the word be united, and let energies be focused on this desired goal: "the democratic state"! For these people, democracy is no longer "dead" or "pork eaten reluctantly out of necessity," but has become something good to be praised and preferred over what Allah has made lawful.
If you eat carrion and pork out of necessity to survive, they do not become praiseworthy or inherently good. It is not permissible for you to eat more than what saves you from death. And Allah the Most High has said: "He who is driven by necessity, neither transgressing nor exceeding, there is no sin upon him." "Neither transgressing nor exceeding" means he does not make it lawful nor does he eat more than necessary. So how about setting aside the Sharia of the Lord of the Worlds and making human opinions and desires a judgment over His Sharia? This is far worse than eating carrion and pork, so it cannot be praised and become the ultimate hope for a Muslim.
Whenever Muslims' expectations from worldly methods fail and they begin to seek the path of pleasing their Lord to save themselves in this world and the Hereafter, someone comes to repair the failed worldly methods, sets them back on their feet, and adorns them in the eyes of Muslims.
We have already explained in detail, esteemed ones, the corruption of democracy in the series "In Defense of Sharia" and that it is a religion other than the religion of Islam. A Muslim cannot combine both and be satisfied with them as a way of life at the same time. Democracy makes what governs not the divine legislation but the positive legislation, then makes the competition about who will undertake this work.
Those who set the rules of what they call "the democratic game" made the basic rule that governance and legislation are for humans, not for Allah. They do not accept any objection to this rule; the condition of competition and victory is to submit to this rule and then act as you wish. This contradicts the name "Islam," which means complete submission and surrender to the rule of Allah the Most High: "But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you a judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves; then they will not find within themselves any discomfort from what you have judged and will submit [Islam] in full submission."
This is the essence of Islam, which is completely absent in this chaos and frenzy of celebrating the results of the Turkish elections. The ruling system and legislation in Turkey are not based on Sharia. So, your joy at pushing back the severe secularism should not mean accepting or being satisfied with the current situation and calling for emulation. A situation being less evil than another does not mean you accept this less evil situation or "submit" to it and make it the ultimate goal.
Setting aside Allah's Sharia from governance is the greatest of evils, and the weakest degree of faith is denial in the heart. If this denial is absent, what remains of your faith?
Of course, brothers, the word "Sharia" is not clear in its contours or it is distorted and stunted in the minds of many. Therefore, we will provide you with a link to a previous concise article titled "Until Our Hearts Submit to Sharia." In the Islamic system, people have a say in choosing the ruler, but with conditions and criteria from the Lord of the Worlds, and he is chosen to establish Sharia, not to rule with a positive system from human whims.
Imagine how dangerous it is for the awareness of future generations that this desired goal is absent! Where is your clarification of the corruption of democracy? If you do not clarify it now, when will you clarify it? And do you actually deal with it as a rotten corpse that you eat out of necessity? Or have you started to appreciate it? Let every one of you ask himself.
Apart from the corruption of the idea of democracy itself, what is this trivial democracy that the infatuated celebrate, which allowed one (Kılıçdaroğlu) who is not of the religion of Islam to threaten to expel Muslim refugees and an agent of foreign entities, allowed him to run so that if the results were split by 2%, he would be your president and you would have to submit to him!
What is your position, O praiser of democracy, if a person who does not belong to Islam at all wins next time, openly hostile to the rituals of Islam? Will you say, "We accept the box"? Or will you turn against him? And by what right do you turn against him if you have entered the democratic game and praised it and called for participation in it as if it were a right and justice?
We have even heard from one of the great celebrities that Islamists should adhere to the democratic game until the end and not transfer it even if its results are contrary to what they wish, even if it brings an atheist or a Jew! To this extent has the normalization with democracy reached.
What is this "ridiculous" democracy in which we saw lost, delusional youth saying, "We will vote for Kılıçdaroğlu because we want more freedom and because the price of beer has become high"? According to the democratic system, these people have votes equal to the vote of the most pious man; for in democracy, all are equal citizens: fornicators, drunkards, thugs, perverts, and criminals... their vote is equal to that of the most rational, most righteous, and most pious! And the directed media machine produces more corruption, washes the minds of the youth, and drags them towards those who fulfill their desires with financial and political support from the enemies of the religion.
Those who exaggerate and do not want anyone to spoil their joy with the results of the elections should ask themselves: how much have they worked over the past years to guide people and direct them to true Islam and its dominance over all aspects of life? And to clarify that it is a comprehensive system of life that does not accept partitioning or voting on it, and that it is an absolute divine right and anything else is sheer falsehood?
All our words, esteemed ones, do not oppose optimism and positivity, but the Muslim should not be attached to people, clapping, and emotional reactions, but rather working with insight. Muslims in Turkey and abroad now have an opportunity in relative freedom to call the Turkish people. The election results show a large percentage who are ignorant or ready to align with those who have agendas to curtail Islam for worldly gains.
You, O callers of Turkey, and O Muslims of Turkey, either call them and Allah guides through you whom He wills of them to be brothers to you, or they will be unleashed upon you by your abstention from calling them and your preoccupation with worldly matters until the day comes when they will constrict you.
So strive and utilize this opportunity to call to Allah. Muslims may not reach in a certain time the state that Allah has pleased for them in the elevation of establishing Sharia, but this goal must remain pure for them, not mixed with hybrid concepts, and they should see nothing else as an Islamic or quasi-Islamic state. If the goal is lost, the steps will be astray.
Finally, we ask Allah to facilitate for the Muslims righteousness in their affairs, to guide Erdoğan and those with him to what He loves and is pleased with, and to make us among those who work to restore the sovereignty of His Sharia over the worlds. Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.