One of the things that shows HT have mutazilah beliefs, deviant views, is just reading the works of their founder ‘Taqi ud-Deen an-Nabahaanee’ – he wrote many books..
Now, one look at the book called "Iman’s path" (Tareequl Imaan) which was also written by Al Nabahani, himself would reveal how this sect have been affected by Al Mu’tazilah thoughts in putting the brains above Quran and Sunnah. They let their brains control Quran and Sunnah, and believe in what seems right to them. The human brain is given more weight than it should. It is known that the human brain are two types - Muslim and non muslim -, and the Muslim brain are two types - scholar and the ignorant one, and the scholar brain are two types - "working with the knowledge scholar" and "non-working with the knowledge" scholar. The ignorant has to follow and ask the scholar as Allah SWT says : "and ask the knowledgeable ones if ye know not". The true Muslim, therefore, must put his brain to what Allah and His prophet say; not to put the thoughts above both of them. In this area, the HT failed.
One of the things that he wrote - in imitation of ar-Raazee (one of the people of Ilm ul-Kalaam) he said that we cannot accept the Quran until it agrees with ten of our conditions - and he used the same phrase of ar-Raazee - one of which is that it should agree with our aql.
If we go go to the book Sharh Usool ul-Khamsah of the Mu'tazilah (p.228) we find that one of the big leaders al-Qaadee Abdul-Jabbaar who said that the way of Ahl us-Sunnah is to believe that the hand of Allaah means power – Nabahannee said the same thing!! Sharh of Fiqhul Akbar of Abu Haneefah (p. 33) - that it should not be said that hand means power and likewise we find in Tabyeen Khadhibul Muftaree (p.150) the saying of al-Ash'aree himself who says likewise that is should not be said that hand means power (i.e. metaphorically) because this is the saying of al-Mu'tazilah - who are the most deviant cult.
One of the most vehement and loudest voices against HT are the salafi’s and wahabis – there are numerous reference I can give, but I know HT and their followers totally dislike salafi/wahabis, so it will be swept under the carpet as lies…..
So I quote other school of thought (hanbali, maliki and Hanafi) who also consider HT mutuzilah a deviant group. Here are some quotes:
- Dr. Abdel-Azim M. al-Siddig (not sure which school of thought, think Maliki): He says: I would not encourage any one though to be involved with Hizbu-t-tahrir. They are very far from reality, calling for the Khilafa without really working for it. This will not make it a reality.
Abu Ja`far al-Hanbali takes a much more firm stand on his site Hanbali Text Society:
Taqi ud-Din an-Nabahaani, a reader in Mu`tazilah theology and a student of knowledge from Jordan, he was the founder of Hizb ut-Tahrir in the year 1953, in an attempt to ‘re-ignite the desire for khilaafa in the hearts of the Musims.’ He was successful in mixing a Salafi-brand type of Islam with Marxist/Leninist ideology that when fused became a volatile recipe of ignorance, confusion and disaster for Muslims worldwide. One can see the followers of this movement today in most urban centres of Islam, spouting slogans, waving black flags and distributing leaflets to beleaguered Muslims emerging from the congregational Jumu`ah prayer. This style of teaching, learned from the party culture, is what replaces any systematic talks and teachings on salvation, theology, the Day of Resurrection and so forth. In fact, many will find that in their books, they are devoid of almost any talk of the Hereafter, Salvation, theology necessary for every believer to know and so forth. Although proclaiming that they are merely a political group, many of their press releases have theological overtones as well as principles. It is usually in college and university that young, naive Muslims are set upon by this organisation.
al-Hanbali continues by pointing out 7 very controversial aspects surrounding this group, which he strongly disapproves of. He associates the group theologically with the Mu`tazila, methodologically with the Salafiyya and politically with socialist ideologies.
Mufti Ebrahim Desai – who is a hanafi, in fiqh, a deobandi and affiliated with TJ
Nowadays, many propounders of Baatil (falsehood) are putting forth their corrupt theories for no reason other than to facilitate fulfilment of their base desires. By the Fadhl (grace) of Allah, this was long ago anticipated by the Ulama who worked to keep the Aqaaid of Deen pure and unadulterated. This latest falsehood being promulgated by the Hizb al-Tahreer is in fact nothing new or encountered by the Ulama of Deen. Some of the Baatil being promulgated by them is, in fact the same as originated by the Mu'tazila 12 centuries ago and more recently by the Jamaat Islaami of Pakistan. The Ulama have successfully repelled both these and numerous other attempts to adulterate the pristine purity of Islam and will, Insha Allah, continue to do so.
So to sweep HT beliefs under the carpet and blame it on wahabism misconceptions is being naïve indeed. Also there are other scholars non-salafi, from South Africa, Pakistan, India, and within Europe, one to whom I have spoken to myself, who consider them a deviant sect:
Abdur-Rahmaan Dimashqiyyah – who has research the group extensively, and written about them as well, says:
They are the dangerous people since they think they are reforming but in reality they are destroying. In the 20th century - end of Uthmaani empire - many groups/cults/organisations that considered that entering the political or taking the political way is the best way to retain the Islamic dignity. They ignored that the laxity of the ummah was the real reason of losing that dignity. These groups were based on emphasism and emotionalism - not on knowledge. They did not seek knowledge, their behaviour was chaotic and it resulted in chaos. The work of da'wah was put aside till the political situation improved - they say put it on the shelf till our political situation improves - but there are many millions of people waiting for the truth. So their priority was to return the khilaafah. Until then they way, we should suspend everything - nothing can be done till it returns. As for the kuffar - let them go to hell - they say, why because we should get our lands back from them. Actuallly, many enemies of Islam became leaders of Islam - this should not be forgotten by us. The Kuffar realise this point hence they support the Christian missionaries - since they open ways/avenues in Muslim communities. Therefore we should do the same amongst them. They deserve to become Muslims and enter Paradise. However our politicians (i.e. the likes of HT) do not give this a consideration.
These people talk about the conspiracy - the cultural invasion - how we are getting attacked by books, schools etc. However there was also an invasion that took place in this ummah many centuries before - Ilm ul-Kalaam - these things hijacked the religion and had influenced the deviance and now people are getting taught these things in 'Islamic Schools' getting degrees etc! So the invasion they talk about is not the only one - but we should know about this one as well!. These people will say there is nothing wrong with you - it is the kuffar they are responsible for it - but they ignore the law of Allaah, if we disobey Allaah's law then he has a law also to punish us.
Hizb ut-Tahrir - have certain signs - always talk about issues of khilaafah, adhaabul-qabr and issue of Ahad hadeeth. This is how to recognise them - they are taught that these are priorities - they say that if you do not work for the khilaafah that you are a mushrik - don't they say this [yes] - because you are not working for the khilaafah! Then what about the lifetime of the Messenger in Makkah were they not Mushriks then? So people do not know when they argue with HT that the establisher of HT was a mixture of mutazil, maatureedee, ash'aree in aqeedah and he used to consider these as People of Tawheed (ASJ) This is the issue we should pick with them. It is not just ahad hadeeth, adhaabul qabr and khilaafah, they have much more deviance than this - such as the use of Ilm ul-Kalaam.
Shaykh Desai is of the Deobandi orientation (Hanafi in Fiqh and Maturidi in Aqida) while Shaykh al-Hanbali follows the Hanbali Fiqh and Athari Aqida. Their objections against HT are very serious and can not be set aside as lies by Wahhabis. Both maintain that HT is heavily influenced by the Mu`tazila in their Aqida, and al-Hanbali adds on with points of various sorts:
On Aqida: "Many of the leaders, still today, hold that there is no punishment of the grave, denying numerous ahaadith as well as verses from the Qur’an that explicitly state this fact."
On Fiqh: "Followers of Hizb ut-Tahrir are commanded to attend lessons a week as a fard (compulsory) order. Missing them requires sincere repentance. They don’t adhere to one of the four orthodox schools as an organisation. Rather, they blend and combine rulings, sometimes even making their own fataawa, such as the permissibility of listening to music with harmonics as well as viewing pornography and the naked body. All of this stems from the fact of a tacit refusal to submit to the methodology of Muslim Orthodoxy."
All these accusations are mentioned in HT publication in the past, I myself avoid there works as they can be corrupting , some sunni scholars intensively have been following there works for years and read their publications, so they can pass there deviance nature and warn us – this is where they get much of their information, so don’t say they are just false rumours, based on heresay. If I had references I would give them to you.
Regarding Punishment of the grave, it is Nabahaanee himself states this, just as the mutazila did, quoting the same hadith, narrated by Abu Hurayrah, and say hdaith means to denial of punishment of grave in aqeeda – see Ad-Dawsiyyah(p.6) of Taqeedu-Deen an-Nabahaanee – which is totally incorrect
So you can’t just pin this on Omar Bakri – He was just reiterating what Nabahnee and HT believed! - Also bear in mind that bakri say’s one of the reason’s he left HT was there difference in aqeeda to ahl us Sunnah
Differentiating between the 'aahaad and 'mutawaatir' ahadeeth in matters of 'aqeedah' is an innovation of the 'Qadariyyah' and the 'Mutazilah' – don’t HT differentiate between these hadith[yes – they do]
Besdie these matters there are many others – were they deviate from Ahl us-Sunnah
The Sunni objections to the HT in terms of Aqida are of a different kind, as mentioned by both Shaykh Desai and Shaykh al-Hanbali; this being first and foremost the influence from the Mu`tazila. Other aspects of Aqida are mentioned by al-Hanbali as well, such as holding "that there is no punishment of the grave, denying numerous ahaadith as well as verses from the Qur’an that explicitly state this fact.". Aside of these differences, the fact that HT is indeed generally not much concerned about matters of creed is yet another objection made: "They do not make it a priority to study systematic theology and the principles of knowing their faith, but are told and tell others that once the khilaafa is established, then such matters can be attended to by the populous. One will find many members unaware of the basis principles of the Muslim Creed, something both frightening as well as unnerving."
But the objections, at least from a Sunni perspective, exceed far beyond the topic of Aqida and enter the realm of Fiqh, Adab, Usul in general and the fashion in which the party has organized itself politically and in other ways. al-Hanbali offers an insightful article in which his objections are summarized
HT focuses on Capitalism as an ideology and they claim that Islam is an ideology as well. This is something that is also quite bizarre, something no other scholars have claimed for a while. Their definition, if we were to accept it, would imply that not only is Islam an ideology (because it has a political and economic system), but also Christianity, Judaism, etc (because they also have their own political economic systems. for christians it was the holy roman empire and the 2nd coming of jesus and for jews, its the state of israel and coming of the messiah). Furthermore, if one looks at their work, their types of references to metaphysical concerns "dialectical materialism", is quite prevalent in their writings. The dead give away, however, is their view that the only way to establish an islamic state is through a political party. This is clearly a communist idea. No scholar ever espoused such a thing, nor did they espouse a constitution like the HT people do. This is what really makes their claim that Nabbhani as a mujtahid mutlaq, not just a mujtahid really laughable because his ijtehad was nothing more then copy/pasting quran and hadeeth to support Western ideas such as constitutionalism and party politics. His ijtehad on Islamic state is not worth the paper it is written on.
Taqleed in Aqeedah - they go to great lengths to show how there is no taqleed in aqeedah and then go on with their proofs. However, this is not necessarily a valid statement. The Ulema of ahl us sunnah waal jamaah have explained that no taqleed in aqeedah means that they cannot place their iman on a condition like "if such and such happens, i will accept islam" or rather 'if such and such happens, i will revoke my acceptable of islam" meaning ones parents accepting islam and then you accepting it and when they die, you revoke it. The use of proofs for the existence of the creator did not come into play until the 3rd century after hegira, prior to that, people accepted Islam on all sorts of grounds. Would we say that the islam of the children of the sahabah (ra) is not valid because they didnt' have any 'proofs' but simply followed the religion of their forefathers?
One of there fatwas: (HT) regarding - Qadaa wal-Qadr, they say these two were never mentioned in the Quran and Sunnah (see: ad-Doosiyah p.18). However, the Messenger said: Aktharoo man yamoot... Most of those who die of my nation after the book of Alaah and the qadaa wal-Qadr of Alaah is by al-anfus (death of the soul) - Al-Haythami Majmoo az-Zawaa'id (5/6) Ibn Hajr authenticated it in FB (10/167). HT put its initial HT Islam built its doctrine based upon aql - the intellect - they said the aqeedah of islam is a mental doctrine (aql) and a political doctrine (siyaasee) (al-Eemaan p.68 and Hizbut-Tahreer p.6) so the aql of these people is the basis of the religion so we know Allaah by our Aql. But in contradiction to that is what they said that separation amongst Muslims was when they used aql in matters of aqeedah (Tafseer of al-Maidah 5/29) and they mention that nations do not arise by good morality but by doctrines and thoughts - and by the methodology that the carrie/practice (A-taqattul al-hizbeep.18) and it says that da'wah for good morality does not correct the society and does not arise the nation but the arising of the soceity takes place by the correction of thoughts and ideas not by calling to good morals (manhaj hizbut-tahreer fit-Taghyeer p.26-27).
In morality and in thought (i.e. aqeedah) and Islam calls for both. Not the way HT see it..
Taqi ud-Deen Nabahaani denied that there are no emotional ties to the soul- no spiritual ties. He said - no ashwaaq roohiyyah fil-Islaam - that is why we see that HT does not have softness and good behaviour with the people, i.e. they are arrogant - they say their are no spiritual effects in the soul.
To sum up Nabahaani – arrogance, he said they will establish the khalifah in 13 years – why 13 years, becoz our prophet (saw) took 13 years – is this arrogance or what, so you ppl see where HT get their arrogance from. As they failed, Nabahaani gave themselves another 30 years and they failed, now I believe it is open ended indefinitely..
He said in Nidhaam al-Islaam p.61 and al-Fikr al-Islaamee al-Mu'aasir p.202, he said - look at the surprise - those who say that the woman as all is awrah this is a collapse, a destruction of morality - i.e the need to cover all etc.. is a destruction - since it must be, he says, that the man and woman must meet together to have commercial exchange. - this is what he says - he says this in his book an-Nidhaam ul-Ijtimaa' fil-Islam p.10 and p.128 - to shake hands with women is not a destruction in morality - but to say a woman should be covered is destruction of morality….laughable
All the whole world to them (HT) is Daarul-Kufr. They say there is no place of Islam today. Because everything is a place of Kufr. Don't they say this?? Do you disagree? I have read this in their papers in their books - they said "the Muslim lands all of them are daarul-kufr - even if its people are Muslims" (Hizbut-Tahreer p.32 &103). So they did not exclude Makkah and Medinah! - That means that there is no Muslims!!! One of their leaders was asked- is their any daarul-Islam today. He said No! He said but I want to do Hijrah!! He said it is not possible. So where is the place of hijrah then? Makkah and Medinah are not places of Islam? Do you go to London then?
One of the greatest truths about the absence of the aqeedah among these people is that they hasten themselves to Iran (I think in 88/89) and they called who to be the khalifah? Do you know who? [khomeini] They called Khomeini to be the khilaafah. Here it is in their newspaper - this is their newpaper al-khilaafah No. 18, Friday, 2nd of January 1410H in this magazine article we open the next page we find 'Hizbut-Tahree wal-Imaam Khomeini' and in this edition they admitted we went to Iran and we invited Khomeini to be the khalifah of the ummah. Read the full article it say’s they said that they called him to rule the khilaafah with the Book and the Sunnah!!! Does khomeini accept the Book and the Sunnah. Are they joking.
The only thing I have against the shia, is I totally disagree with their beliefs. I could not give my bayaa to a person who insults the mother of the believers Aisha (ra) and insults the sahaba’s – could you!!
Why Hizb ut Tahrir is a Cult
There are a number of ways that Hizb ut-Tahrir has matched and put itself in line with Mu`tazilah theology, the most prominent being the basing of their theology upon following Taqi ud-Din an-Nabahaani, which is unfortunate. There are also other problems, such as,
1. The denial of the punishment of the grave, which is a continual problem for their leadership, certain naqibs and mushrifs, depending on the area. This can be accessed from Taqi ud-Din an-Nabahaani's writings, such as ad-Dusiyyah, p. 6. This is connected with the fact that this organisation, starting with its' leader rejects ahaad ahaadith out of hand, something that the early generations did not do.
2. Thus their denial of the punishment of the grave springs from the symptom of dividing hadith in theology into mutawaatir (mass transmitted) and ahaad (transmitted singly). Thus they believe that the ahaadith on the punishment of the grave are ahaad and thus it is not required to take them into the theology.
We do acknowledge that there are individual members that do not believe this and make this classification, but this is in spite of Hizb ut-Tahrir. Its' foundation, from its' beginning to its' early pioneers made the classification aforementioned. If one should check the work, Nidham ul-Islam, pp. 1-14, they will see that this designation of ahaad and mutawaatir in theology is made, but the English has been made less explicit than the original Arabic, unfortunately.
3. It is compulsory for the Ummah to follow Hizb ut-Tahrir (the book, Hizb ut-Tahrir, pp. 1-4, 5-7, 11-15 and others) and that Hizb ut-Tahrir is to be held as the leader of the Ummah (How the Khilaafah was destroyed, pp. iv-3). It has then been made compulsory for Muslims to follow Hizb ut-Tahrir as they are the only sect that should be followed, according to their own literature. This is the same method that the Mu`tazilah adopted when they named themselves, 'Ahl ut-Tawhid wal-`Adl,' the People of Unicity of Allah and Justice.
They considered that all must follow them, which is why there was an Inquisition some 1,000 or more years ago with the Orthodox Muslims and no more than 10,000 Mu`tazilah (the Hizb ut-Tahrir is only 10,000 more in number).
4. Indoctrination on the students that follow them before they are exposed to the revelation. Thus someone in the organisation for the first 1-2 years as one of the shabaab of the Hizb will have gone through three books, which were written and designed to shape their minds. After this, they then look into the Revelation, but only after their minds are shaped. The Mu`tazilah leader Ibn Du'aad used the same methods for seeking out devotees.
Thus they never hear the good news of salvation not based on deeds and that a relationship with Allah is not something that one must rationally prove, but it is there and waiting for whoever will take it. Hizb ut-Tahrir does not make it a priority to study basic Orthodox theology.
5. One must know the proofs and evidence before believing something in theology. This is also the Mu`tazilah theology and with this they negate the faith or strength of faith existent in the Ummah (Please see Nidham ul-Islam, pp. 3-7).
6. The leader of Hizb ut-Tahrir has stated that man is the author of his actions by creation and choice and not Allah, who then judges man on his deeds. This is falling into the trap of believing that salvation is based on deeds and that good and bad deeds must be rewarded or punished by Allah, who is bounded to punish them (please see Nidham ul-Islam, pp. 8-11).
Imam an-Nawawi, rahimahullah, and the other Orthodox fathers showed the fallacy in this reasoning when commenting upon the hadith, 'No one of you is saved by his deeds, but by the Mercy of Allah,' as related in sahih of Imaam Muslim.
7. There is an enslavement of the common Muslim by making those precious Muslims who are new recruits suffer being taught Nidham ul-Islam, Mafaahim and at-Takatul al-Hizbi in place of learning the revelation.
8. Upon then being found acceptable, they are made to swear an oath in front of their naqib or regional leader that they will obey the party and its' principles even if they go against their own opinions (which could be the foundational points of the Orthodox creed) as long as they live (al-Qanun al-Idaari, pp. 3-4).
9. It then should be understood that while Hizb ut-Tahrir certainly possesses Orthodox Muslims amongst their ranks that do not understand that fullness of what they have done or what that organisation represents, Hizb ut-Tahrir is a a cult that is dangerous to the spiritual and physical well being of Muslim Orthodoxy and as such should not be joined by those with a discerning character and careful mind for consideration.
And I would call all members of Hizb ut-Tahrir, those who would read this or who would be told this information through another channel, to leave that organisation and start a new life, firstly by re-integrating back into the Muslim community and then seeking to study and understand their faith by accessing the revelation, not looking for proof-texts.
These only a few things which I have been able to gather, I am no scholar and most the things written by the ulema is way over my head. But the important thing is that the accusation comes form all quarters, not just salafi’s, but also the scholars of the four madhab’s – and the accusation are very serious indeed. If we give them the benefit of doubt in number of issues, at best we can say they are seriously misguided.
EVERYONE: some of the things mentioned, does this explain why they behave in the way they do – in terms of speech and action
Wa Alaikum Mus Salam Warahamtullahi Wabrakatahu