Title: A Further Exchange on the Interpretation of Directives Relating to 'Bay`ah' ... Question/Comments: The full text of the hadith you seem to have confusion over is as follows: al-Bukhari narrated about Bisr ibn Obaydellah al-Hadhrami that he heard Abu Idrees al-Khoolani say that he heard Huthaifah ibn al-Yaman saying: The people used to ask the Prophet of Allah (saw) about the good and I used to ask him about the bad in fear that it might catch me. So I said: O Prophet of Allah! We were in times of jahilliyah and mischief then Allah brought us this good, so is there any mischief after this good? He (saw) said: Yes. I said: Will there be any good after that mischief? He said: Yes, and it has smoke. I said: What is its smoke? He said: (Some) people guide without any guidance, you recognize some (from them) and deny some. I said: Will there be a mischief after that good? He said: Yes, (some) people who invite at the doors of hell, whoever accepted their invitation they throw him in it (hell). I said: O Prophet of Allah, describe them to us. He said: They are of our own skin (of our people) and talk our language. I said: What do you order me to do if that (matter) caught me? He said: Adhere to the jama'ah of Muslims and their Imam. I said: What if the Muslims have no jama'ah nor an Imam? He said: Then you abandon all those groups, even if you have to grab with your teeth the trunk of a tree till death comes to you as such. The hadith does not support your conclusions that we do not have to work to establish Khilafah in the absence of the ameer or state (jamaah) - this is not what Hudaifah was asked to do. This hadith is clear in its wording that the Prophet (saw) orders Muslims to adhere to the jama'ah of Muslims and to adhere to their Imam, and to leave those who invite people to the doors of hell. This I believe we can agree on. When the questioner asked him that in case the Muslims have no Imam and no jama'ah what he has to do in regard with those who call at the doors of hell, the Prophet (saw) ordered him to abandon these groups which call to hell fire no matter what (even if you have to grab a tree with your teeth!). Note carefully, the Prophet (saw) did not comment on the actions of working to establish Khilafah or not working to establish Khilafah - i.e. he did not say to disassociate himself from the Muslims (who are not calling to hell fire) nor to abstain from the action for establishing an Imam . So his order is clear, disassociate yourself from all those groups, and he emphasized the dissociation of those groups even to the extent that his isolation from them would make him clench to the trunk of a tree until death comes to him. It means adhere to your deen by staying away from the misleading callers who are at the doors of hell. In this hadith there is no excuse or permission (for anybody) to abandon the work for establishing a Khaleefah , it is, rather, confined to the command of adhering to the deen and abandoning the callers at the doors of hell, and the sin will remain on him if he does not work to establish a Khaleefah . So he is ordered to abandon the misleading groups in order to save his deen from the callers of the misguidance, even if he had to clench to the trunk of a tree, but not to distance himself from the Muslim community and abandon the work for establishing the laws of the deen and establishing an Imam for Muslims. You are however trying to make a conclusion on a subject, which is not discussed here in the hadith - thus, the response I gave you is quite clear in its applicability and refutes what you understand from this narration. Namely, absence of a comment/action on a subject from the Prophet(saw) is no evidence on that subject - on the contrary we find comments on the topic of establishing Khilafah come from other evidences. Accordingly, no Muslim on the face of this earth has an excuse to abandon the duty of establishing the deen which Allah (swt) has ordered, that is, the establishment of a Khaleefah for Muslims, when there is no Khilafah on the earth, and no one to implement the hudood (limits) of Allah (swt) to protect the sanctities of Allah (swt), and no one to implement the laws of the deen and unify the Muslim community under the banner of La ilaha illa Allah , Muhammad ur-Rasul Allah. There is no permission in Islam to abandon the work for this duty until it is indeed completed. This should clear up any remaining confusion ia - I look forward to hearing from you. Answer: Thank you very much for your explanation. However, I must confess that you have an incredible ability of taking me by surprise and astonishing me with your remarks. My dear brother, I really cannot bring myself to imagine that while writing your interpretation of the referred narrative you were aware of the fact that the person being directly addressed in the narrative was one of the senior companions of the Prophet (pbuh); a companion, who had sacrificed his loved ones and his belongings at the call of the Prophet (pbuh); a companion, who migrated from his homeland to help the cause of God; a companion, who was blessed with the company of the Prophet (pbuh) and his other companions during a major part of his life. Do you really think that a person of the level of Hudhayfah ibn al-Yamaan (ra) was still vulnerable toward the groups, which call toward hellfire? I, therefore, find it very difficult to agree with your interpretation and explanation of the stated narrative. The mere fact that a group of people have been described by the Prophet (pbuh) as "people who invite to the doors of hell", should be evidence enough for a Muslim of average intelligence and knowledge to keep himself clear of all these groups. I find the implication of the words to be absolute clear. I am sure that you do too. Do you really think that this implication was not clear for Hudhayfah ibn al-Yamaan (ra)? A close examination of the question asked by Hudhayfah (ra) and the answer given by the Prophet (pbuh) clearly shows that both the question and the answer relate to one's responsibilities toward one's collectivity in situations of widespread evil and disturbance. Thus, had Hudhayfah' s (ra) question: "What do you order me to do if that (matter) caught me?" related specifically (and unbelievably!!!) to the referred groups, which were promoting evil, then the Prophet (pbuh) should have directly answered that the companion should remain clear from associating himself with any of these groups. However, as is quite clear, this is not what the Prophet (pbuh) did. The fact is that the question clearly relates to one's responsibilities toward one's collectivity. Whatever the Prophet (pbuh) said in response to the question precisely describes exactly that. Thus, when the companion asks the Prophet (pbuh) "What do you order me to do if that (matter) caught me?", the Prophet replies: "Adhere to the Muslim state and their Imam ." This answer clearly relates to one's responsibilities toward the collectivity. However, the companion continues to ask: "What if the Muslims have neither an organized state nor an Imam ?", thereby asking the Prophet (pbuh) regarding his responsibilities in case the collectivity loses all organization and falls prey to anarchy. At this, the Prophet (pbuh) responds with: "Then just keep yourself clear of all those groups, even if you have to grab with your teeth the trunk of a tree till death comes to you as such." It is quite clear that we do not agree on the implication of the referred narrative. According to my understanding, the narrative tells the companion of his responsibilities toward the collectivity, in a situation where the collectivity falls prey to anarchy. In such a situation, the Muslims are directed to stand by their ruler and protect their state; and in case the collective organization loses its existence and there is no ruler of the Muslims, then the Muslims should keep themselves clear of all the groups and live a life of individual piety. Thus, in another narrative ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), when Amr ibn al-`Aas asked the Prophet (pbuh) regarding his responsibilities under such circumstances of anarchy, the Prophet (pbuh) replied: Keep yourself confined to your house; control your tongue; take to what you know to be 'good'; leave what you know to be 'bad'; adhere to all matters of individual (personal) piety and do not interfere in others' matters. On the contrary, according to your understanding, the narrative only informs us about the already known - i.e. 'to stay clear of such groups which call toward the gates of hellfire'. I really do not think we have any other option but to accept our differences and let the readers make up their minds about the correct understanding of the referred narrative, in the light of our exchange. In case you want to add anything to this discussion, I would welcome that. However, I would request you to kindly take a look at my previous writings relating to the issue of 'Khilaafah' , to avoid any repetition. February 27, 2001