Video - Reformist Egyptian Journalist Islam Behery: Al-Azhar Considers Me More Dangerous than ISIS.

The Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, the top Sunni Islamic authority, has condemned “extremist and racist” Trump comments.

The Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, the top Sunni Islamic authority, has condemned “extremist and racist” Trump comments. (ES).

The Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, the top Sunni Islamic authority, has condemned recent “extremist and racist” comments by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump that had called for barring all Muslims from entering the United States.

In multiple statements, the Grand Sheikh warned that the comments would “increase tensions” within the United States and would provoke Muslims across the globe.

“We warn against such hate speech, which represents a clear provocation of one and a half billion Muslims around the world, and is incompatible with all religions, international conventions, and humanitarian principles,” said Ahmed El-Tayeb, the Grand Sheikh, in a statement.

Dar El-Iftaa, which is responsible for issuing religious edicts, also issued a statement condemning Trump’s comments.

“It is unfair to punish all Muslims because of a group of extremists whose criminal actions are repudiated by Islam,” read the statement by Dar El-Iftaa. Read the full story here.

DHS Secretary: " IslamicState is Not Islamic” - Al-Ahzar: "IS Must Not Be Accused Of Heresy"

DHS Sec: To Call IS Islamic is “Dignifying Them As Occupying Some Form Of Islam” - Al-Ahzar: "IS Must Not Be Accused Of Heresy" (JihadWatch).

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson was reduced to stammering tautologies when George Stephanopoulos asked him why the administration won’t call the Islamic State Islamic: “Now I have to say, when I travel around the country and meet with Muslim leaders in this country in these engagements that I have, they all tend to say pretty much the same thing, which is that ‘ISIL has hijacked my religion.’

And so, in my view, if we start referring to ISIL as occupying any form of the Islamic theology, we’re pretty much dignifying them as occupying some form of, of that faith, and I know that Muslim leaders in this country, uh, push back hard on that, and it seems to me, it’s, it’s going to a, a, a place where ISIL would very much like us to go, in that we’re dignifying them as occupying some form of Islam.

They, they don’t. Islam is about peace and brotherhood. There are 1.6 billion Muslims in this world, and the true Islamic faith has nothing to do with what ISIL represents. And so, to, to start labeling them as ‘Islam’ or as ‘Islamic State’ in any respect, I think gives them far more dignity than they deserve. And so do a lot of Muslims believe that, too, by the way.”

Johnson took a long time to say, several times, that the Islamic State is not truly Islamic, and to call them Islamic wouldn’t give them an unwarranted dignity.

Al Ahzar the highest Sunni authority said Quote:

"Al-Azhar: The Islamic State (ISIS) Is A Terrorist Organization, But It Must Not Be Accused Of Heresy." So in my book that Qualifies as ISLAMIC!

In recent days, Al-Azhar, considered the most important educational institute and religious authority in the Sunni Islamic world, has been forced to deal with the question of whether members of the Islamic State (ISIS) are heretics. 

On December 3, 2014, at Al-Azhar's International Counterterrorism Conference in Cairo, Nigeria Mufti Sheikh Ibrahim Saleh Al-Husseini said in a speech that, by their actions, extremist organizations such as Boko Haram and their ilk bring a judgment of heresy upon themselves. 

Al-Husseini did not say explicitly that ISIS was heretic, but he did say that that "the statements and declarations [of these organizations] are what has brought them to heresy," and that "those who accuse others of heresy are [themselves] viewed as heretics by the shari'a." 

In other words, he accused the organization of heresy indirectly. Hence, his statements were interpreted by some media in the Muslim world as a fatwa by him that ISIS is a heretical organization. [1]

Al-Azhar, apparently alarmed by the reports that a fatwa accusing ISIS of heresy had been issued at a conference it hosted, hastened to deny the reports. 

Al-Azhar's reluctance to proclaim ISIS heretical reflects the caution of Sunni Islam in the matter of takfir (i.e., the practice of accusing other Muslims of heresy). 

Beyond the religious position that advocates avoiding takfir as far as possible, directing this accusation at ISIS can have far-reaching political implications. 

First, it places Al-Azhar in direct confrontation with ISIS. 

Second, since the Egyptian regime has been drawing a parallel between ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), an accusation of heresy against the former could be interpreted as applying to the latter as well. 

This could exacerbate the internal conflict in Egypt between the regime on the one hand and the MB and various terror organizations on the other, perhaps even leading to civil war in the country.

Hence, Al-Azhar, and the Nigerian mufti himself, swiftly denied the statements that had been attributed to him by some figures and media reports. 

In a December 5, 2014 interview with the Egyptian CBC TV, Al-Husseini said that, while ISIS' actions were indeed against Islam and a grave sin that must be condemned, these actions must not be called heretical. 

Al-Azhar issued an official statement denying the accusation of heresy that had been attributed to the Nigerian mufti, and several of its members presented various explanations for their refusal to consider ISIS heretical. 

They claimed that Islam prohibits one person from accusing another of heresy, and that the way to deal with those who engage in takfir is to direct the same accusation against them. 

Al-Azhar scholars also claimed that ISIS cannot be considered heretical as long as it adheres to the shahada – the Muslim declaration that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is His Messenger – even if its actions contradict Islam. 

Additionally, they said that it was not Al-Azhar's place to judge whether anyone is a heretic, or to examine the tenets of their faith, since only God can know what is in someone's heart. 

Condemning someone as a heretic, they said, may be done only by a shari'a judge, after it is found by comprehensive and careful examination that the person deliberately chose heresy and has no intention to repent. For this reason, Al-Azhar said, it never intended to rule on whether ISIS was heretical.

Al-Azhar members stressed that their refusal to accuse ISIS of heresy must not be seen as either implicit support for the organization or opposition to the fight against it. 

They explained that ISIS is a terrorist organization whose actions deviate from the correct Islam, but at the same time they clarified again and again that judging whether or not it is heretical is beyond their authority. 

It should be mentioned that Al-Azhar and the Egyptian religious establishment have recently been campaigning against ISIS and other groups, such as the MB, depicting them as terror organizations that have strayed from Islam and harm both Islam and Muslims.

The following is a review of the statements by the Nigerian mufti and of Al-Azhar's position on accusing ISIS of heresy.Read the full story here. Hmmm.....So much for 'ISIS has NOTHING TO DO WITH ISLAM'

Related:  

Sheikh alAzhar: Intl plot against Arabs, Muslims in accordance with colonization and World Zionism [AR]

The Reality of ISIS - Characterization of the organization and the true nature of its beliefs.

The Reality of ISIS - Characterization of the organization and the true nature of its beliefs.


Statement on the reality of the Islamic State organization and their leader Ibrahim Awwad: Characterization of the organization and the true-nature of its beliefs

Written by: Sheikh Dr Tariq Abdelhallem & Sheikh Dr Hani Al-Sibai

The strife of the organization known as The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria has spread like wild-fire and thrived into a bitter reality for many reasons beyond the focus of this statement. Many lives have been lost senselessly, many families and homes destroyed, many sincere leaders of Mujahideen assassinated, the image of Islam tarnished and smeared, and many laymen Muslims are left confused as result of ISIS’s boom.

ISIS presented the worst possible picture of Jihad to the world and made a mockery of Islam globally; while Islam and Jihad are innocent of ISIS’s action and unlike anything they present or stand for. The only true achievement of this group is to distort the reality of the true Islamic State and Islam itself.

They and their so-called Khalifa, Ibrahim Awwad, served and achieved the objective of the West, which ultimately is smearing the image of Islam and presenting a distorted and ugly representation of it; something that the West with all its might, media and treachery have failed to achieve on their own.

We tried through tens of articles, recorded video and audio messages to explain the true nature of ISIS and that it presented a new form of an old sect historically known as Khawarij or Harooriya.

They are a new offshoot of Khawarij in their worst manifestation and extremist ideology of killing Muslims and sparing idol worshippers. We noticed that there’s lots of debate amongst those concerned about the Islamic affairs about the nature of their ideology and we decided without hesitation to state our clear view beyond any shadow of doubt.

It’s our duty to Allah to clarify what ISIS stands for relative to the aqeeda of Ahlul Sunnah and to clarify the Islamic ruling in dealing with them and consequences of their actions and not to be silenced by misguided forbearance, especially because many youth in Syria and around the world are confused with this regard.

This type of misguided forbearance particularly after the spread of this evil and the wide killings of many sincere Muslims should never deter or dissuade those whom Allah SWT has entrusted with knowledge to clearly articulate and clarify the truth regarding the proper characterization of “The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria” and the correct ruling in dealing with their swords, daggers and guns that are collectively aimed at Muslims especially the Mujahideen amongst them.
Read the full overview and rulings here.

Compare to Al Ahzar: Al-Azhar: The Islamic State (ISIS) Is A Terrorist Organization, But It Must Not Be Accused Of Heresy

Download (PDF):

549kb

https://archive.org/details/RealityISIS
https://archive.org/download/RealityISIS/RealityofISIS.pdf

 Read Online:

http://justpaste.it/iop2

Publications of Al-Maqreze Centre for Historical Studies

إصدارات مركز المقريزي للدراسات التاريخية

Published by Al-Maqreze Media Centre

HT and Source:

#Excerpts_from_the_book_the_reality_of_ISIS ENGLISH: "The Reality of #ISIS" http://t.co/whnN8wbaEI pic.twitter.com/uREtUGKAUI

— LetteredOwl (@LetteredOwl) January 2, 2015

Egypt - Al-Azhar cleric to Muslim Brotherhood: Stop ‘insulting, humiliating’ top Sunni authority.

Egypt - Al-Azhar cleric to Muslim Brotherhood: Stop ‘insulting, humiliating’ top Sunni authority.(AA).

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood must stop “humiliating and insulting” the Sunni Muslims’ top religious authority, Al-Azhar, a cleric from the highly-revered establishment told Al Arabiya Wednesday in an interview aired on Al Arabiya’s Panorama program.

 “Al-Azhar has never been insulted like it was today, not from the French, the Brits, not from the Turks, not from the Mamaleek,” Sheikh Ahmed Karima said. 

The spat between the Brotherhood and the center of Islamic learning was heightened when the principle of Egypt’s al-Azhar University, Osama al-Abed, was dismissed on Wednesday amid student protesting after alleged food poisoning struck more than 500 students. The university students surrounded the religious institution the same day to demand the grand mufti, Ahmed Al-Tayeb, also step down.
“I am saddened over the sacking of Osama al-Abed,” he told Al Arabiya, saying that he only expresses his “own personal view.” Al-Abed was made to manage the university on his own with little resources amid student protests, Karima said, adding that this was because the Brotherhood-led government wanted to put more pressure on the sacked principle. “Osama Al-Abed has worked hard during tough times… he had no deputies for the past seven months, he has managed the university on his own.” 
The cleric accused the Brotherhood of exploiting the food poisoning incident, saying: “The escalation of the situation has nothing to do with the poisoning of students’ stomachs but the poisoning of students’ brains.”
 He said the Brotherhood is bribing students and the Salafists were working hard to influence the students’ way of thinking. “
On Fridays, students are taken by buses to see Salafist sheikhs who accuse Al-Azhar of blasphemy.”
The cleric also accused the Brotherhood of giving a “militant man,” such as the Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniye, a platform inside the Al-Azhar establishment.Hmmmm......Salafi-jihadi sheikh Abu Mundhir Al-Shinqiti"democracy and Islam are incompatible."Read the full story here.

An Examination Of Egypt's Draft Constitution Part I: Religion And State – The Most Islamic Constitution In Egypt's History.

An Examination Of Egypt's Draft Constitution Part I: Religion And State – The Most Islamic Constitution In Egypt's History.(Memri). By: L. Lavi.* President Mursi recently declared commitment to implementing religious law. 

According to Mursi, "all agree that the Islamic shari'a is the constitution that rules all aspects of life. Only what was conveyed in the honorable Koran will be read and only it will be heeded… [The Koran] will be the basis for all matters pertaining to the general populace – not only Muslims – and to their activities in politics, agriculture, economy and all other fields." 

In practice, however, the MB has generally sided with the relatively moderate Al-Azhar in the partial (rather than full) implementation of the shari'a. Its stance on this matter points to the movement's pragmatism and its willingness to make compromises on its ideology as it makes the transition from a persecuted opposition to the ruling power responsible for the country's stability. Nonetheless, senior MB officials have made it clear that they still consider full implementation of the shari'a to be their end-goal, but one to be achieved at a later stage, once the people's hearts and minds have been gradually attuned to this.(Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi explains the general principle ... Sharia Gradually No Chopping Hands for 1st Five Years.)
Following is a summary of the articles in the draft constitution pertaining to the status of religion.

Article 1, which deals with Egypt's orientation, was amended. It now defines the Egyptian people as "part of the Islamic nation," a definition that did not appear in the previous constitution.

Article 2, which defines Islam as the "state religion" and "the principles [our emphasis] of Islamic shari'a" as "the main source of legislation," remains intact. The decision to leave it unchanged was a compromise between the Salafis and the liberals. The Salafis wanted the word "principles" either deleted or replaced with the word "directives"; in other words, they wanted full implementation of the shari'a, as in the early days of Islam. The liberals would have preferred to see the entire article deleted and Egypt defined as a civil state, or, at the very least, to leave the article with its original wording and to interpret the term "principles of the Islamic shari'a" as universal principles of justice, liberty, and equality. Leaving this article unchanged also reflects an effort of the MB to convey to the West and to the Egyptian citizens that its rise to power did not portend a radical Islamization of Egypt.

Article 219, added to the constitution to clarify Article 2, states: "[The expression] 'principles of Islamic shari'a' refers to the general methods of juridical argumentation, to fundamental juridical rules and principles, and to the [written] sources recognized by the Sunni juridical schools." Its role is to prevent a narrow reading of Article 2, like the liberals want or like the interpretation given by the Supreme Constitutional Court in 1996, according to which legislation from then on would be in keeping only with limited parts of the shari'a about which the various jurisprudential schools within Islam are in agreement. Article 219, in contrast, gives Article 2 a broader reading, which would enable the implementation of a larger part of the shari'a and require legislation to conform to the principles of Sunni law. The article was intended to appease the Salafis and to dispel the charges leveled against the MB that it had given up on implementing the shari'a by its opposition to the amendment of Article 2. Out of consideration for liberal circles, this article was placed toward the end of the constitution, and not immediately following Article 2, in order to indicate that it was of lesser importance. Article 219 allows the codification of the shari'a and enables discrimination against all who are not Sunni Muslims, including Shi'ites. It is not clear at this point how it will affect legislation in practice.

Article 3, newly added to the constitution, defines "the canon principles of Egyptian Christians and Jews" as "the main source of legislation for their personal status laws, their religious affairs, and the selection of their spiritual leaders." This article was introduced in order to create a semblance of tolerance and to appease the Copts, who claimed that Article 2 would serve as a basis for discrimination against them; however, it does not refer to other non-Muslim religions, such as Bahais.

Article 4 was added to the draft constitution in order to consolidate the status of Al-Azhar as the state's religious authority. It defines Al-Azhar as "an encompassing independent Islamic institution, with exclusive autonomy over its own affairs" and the Al-Azhar Sheikh as an "independent" position-holder who "cannot be dismissed." In other words, this article recognizes Al-Azhar as the supreme religious body of Egypt and presents it as an apolitical body independent of the regime. Nevertheless, Article 4 states: "Al-Azhar senior scholars are to be consulted in matters pertaining to Islamic law" – a concept that appeared in the platform of the MB's Freedom and Justice Party. The inclusion of this clause in Article 4 reflects the great influence of the MB on the draft constitution. Its inclusion is also aimed at requiring the Supreme Constitutional Court – the sole body with the authority to interpret the laws and determine whether they are in keeping with the constitution, including with the principles of the shari'a mentioned therein (Article 175) – to consult with Al-Azhar on matters pertaining to the shari'a. At the same time, the opinion of Al-Azhar in matters of Islamic shari'a is not binding. The phrasing is the outcome, on the one hand, of pressure by the Salafis to divest the Supreme Constitutional Court of its exclusive authority to interpret principles of shari'a, and, on the other hand, of taking into consideration the liberal voices that call to refrain from giving the religious establishment legislative authorities. The Supreme Constitutional Court, and not Al-Azhar, remains.

Article 5 states that "sovereignty is for the people; it is they who exercise and protect it, and safeguard national unity, and they are the source of authority, in the manner specified in the constitution." This phrasing is contrary to the position of the Salafis, who insisted upon writing that sovereignty is for the Lord.

Article 6 states that "the political system is based upon the principles of democracy and shura (an Islamic principle obligating the ruler to consult with authoritative advisors)." This addition, too, represents an attempt to please both the liberals, who wished to define Egypt's regime as democratic, and the Salafis, who wished to avoid the term democracy and use the term shura instead. The inclusion of both terms represents a compromise between the two approaches. The Salafis on the Constituent Assembly agreed to this phrasing on the grounds that it distinguishes Egyptian democracy from Western-style democracy and defines Egypt as a parliamentary regime subject to Islamic tradition, which means that practices such as same-sex marriage, for example, are not permitted. Conversely, moderate Islamic and liberal circles accepted this phrasing on the basis of the rationale that shura is a component of democracy and does not detract from the democratic character of the regime. The article goes on to state that the political system is based upon the principles of "citizenship (under which all citizens are equal in rights and duties), multi-party pluralism, peaceful transfer of power, separation of powers and the balance between them, the rule of law, and respect for human rights and freedoms." This was intended to clarify that despite the inclusion of Islamic principles, Egypt is not a theocracy.
Article 6 also abolishes the prohibition on forming denominational parties – which was part of Article 5 of the previous constitution – specifying instead that "no political party shall be formed that discriminates on the basis of gender, origin, or religion." The ban on denominational parties was added by Mubarak in 2005 to the 1971 constitution in order to prevent the MB from forming a political party and running for parliament. The new phrasing means that a party may not restrict its membership on the basis of religion.

Article 10 states: "The family is the basis of society and is founded on religion, morality, and patriotism. The state and society strive to preserve the genuine character of the Egyptian family, its cohesion and stability, and to protect its moral values, all as regulated by law. The state shall ensure maternal and child health services free of charge and shall enable the reconciliation between the duties of a woman toward her family and toward her work..." This article omits the clause, present in the previous constitution, that specifies that the state shall ensure equality between men and women without violating the directives of the Islamic shari'a. This clause was rejected by women's organizations, which feared that subjecting women's equality to the directives of the shari'a would lead to lowering the legal age of marriage, mandating the hijab, denying women the right to divorce, etc. The Salafis, for their part, insisted upon the inclusion of the reference to the shari'a, refusing to let the equality clause stand without it. The clause in the 1971 constitution that ensured women representation in parliament was also removed from the draft constitution. There is, however, some attempt to address the issue of discrimination – albeit not specifically with regard to women – in Article 33, which states: "All citizens are equal in the eyes of the law. They have equal public rights and duties without discrimination."

Article 43 states that "freedom of belief is an inviolable right" and that "the state shall guarantee the freedom to practice religious rites and to establish places of worship for the divine religions [our emphasis]." Human rights organizations wanted the article to include the words "absolute freedom of belief," claiming that the weaker phrase "freedom of belief" prevented one from converting to another religion. Moreover, this article provides for the worship of monotheistic religions only, in contrast to the previous constitution, which did not restrict freedom of worship to specific religions of any kind.
Article 44 states that "insult or abuse of all religious messengers and prophets shall be prohibited." This article was added on the initiative of Al-Azhar in order to prevent blasphemy. The original proposal was to prohibit affront to the essence of God and to the Companions of the Prophet, but, following pressure by Shi'ites and Copts, only part of Al-Azhar's proposal was accepted.Read the full story here.

* L. Lavi is a research fellow at MEMRI.

Al-Azhar rejects laws annulling its religious reference.

Al-Azhar rejects laws annulling its religious reference.(Imra).Al-Azhar rejects any laws concerning its role that were not primarily drafted by members of the institution, Grand Imam Ahmed al-Tayyeb said in a statement on Wednesday. “Such laws cannot be issued in the absence of the Al-Azhar scholars themselves,” he said. Salafi MP Ali Katamesh had submitted a proposal to Parliament’s Proposals and Complaints Committee saying Al-Azhar should not be the final reference on religious issues. “We have the right to reply to that suggestion before the committee,” said Tayyeb, adding that Law 13/2012 confirmed Al-Azhar’s final reference and the responsibility of the imam in all matters relating to the affairs of Islam, its heritage and the Holy Quran. While Tayyeb welcomed criticism, particularly from Parliament, he said Al-Azhar would not agree to be deprived of the status it has acquired over a thousand years in Egypt and the Islamic world, and to be transformed into a mere school of theology. “This will create a legislative vacuum and ideological chaos,” he said. “The moderate thought of Al-Azhar spares Egypt the risk of chaos,” he added.Read the full story here.

Egypt Al-Azhar seat of Sunni Islam says no return to Constituent Assembly.

Egypt Al-Azhar seat of Sunni Islam says no return to Constituent Assembly.(BM).CAIRO: The Islamic Research Academy, Al Azhar, and seat of Sunni Islam, decided on Tuesday at its emergency meeting held under the chairmanship of the Sheikh Al-Azhar, Grand Imam Dr. Ahmed Al-Tayeb, to hold on to its previous decision not to participate in the Constituent Assembly drafting Egypt`s new constitution, and insisting on its withdrawal despite negotiations and attempts by the Muslim Brotherhood to convince Al Azhar to return. This comes after the Coptic Orthodox and Catholic Churches representatives, along with the representatives of the Supreme Constitutional Court, chairman of the Lawyers Syndicate, members of Leftist and Liberal parties and prominent Public figures withdrew and boycotted the session of the Constituent Assembly in protest of the monopoly of the Muslim Brotherhood`s Political Wing the Freedom and Justice Party and the Salafist Nour Party, over the selection criteria of the Assembly`s Membership. The adviser to the Sheikh of Al Azhar , Sheikh Mahmoud Azab, said after the end of the session of the Islamic Research Academy, which was held at Al-Azhar, that Al Azhar is dissatsified with the representation in the constituent Assembly, as it does not represent all spectrums of the nation, he said. Azab said that The Research Academy discussed all the proposals made by the leader of the FJP Party Mohammed Morsy to make some concessions, but it found that these proposals are inadequate, adding, “If the selection criteria is changed and pleases all the spectra of the society, Al Azhar would definitely return to the Assembly. For his part, Mahmoud al-Muhanna, a member of the Islamic Research Academy, said that Al-Azhar represents the whole nation, pointing out that if Al-Azhar is marginalized, it means that the whole nation is marginalized and excluded from the Assembly. Muhanna explained that the members of the Islamic Research Academy decided after studying the proposals not to return and be bound by this decision, until all the spectra of the society are represented equally and fairly in the Assembly, indicating that the former Mufti of the Republic, Dr. Nasr Farid Wasel, the sole representative of Al-Azhar in the Assembly decided with the Academy members not to participate.Hmmm......The Egyptian people have objections to the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafist, apparently Obama has not.Read the full story here.