Hizb-ut-Tahrir claims to be an Islamic political party that was established in 1953, by Taqi-ud-din an-Nabhani, to re-establish the khilafah (caliphate) that was lost by the Muslims in 1924 when Mustafa Kamal Ataturk abolished the seat of the caliphate.
This party is well-established in many countries even though they face a lot of opposition from the governments of those countries. These countries include Muslim as well as non-Muslim countries. This group is particularly active among the Muslim youth. This is mainly due to the fact that they try to spread their message in universities and their techniques are very attractive for the Muslim youth.
However, even though they usually gather a lot of support from the youth, elders are not that attracted to it and many even claim that the party is not completely Islamic, i.e. it does not follow all Islamic principles and that its working is not Islamic.
I, therefore, hope to make this point clear to all Muslims in this article as to whether this group is worth considering to be joined or not.
Working for the Re-Establishment of the Khilafah
As far as this sub-topic is concerned, there is no dispute among the Muslims that it is an obligation of the Muslims to re-establish the Khilafah as Islam cannot be completely established without it. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with working for the re-establishment of the Khilafah.
Methodology for its Re-establishment
Even though many people claim that there is something wrong with the methodology of Hizb-ut-Tahrir, I have not been able to find any problem with it. Therefore, with what information I currently have, we can accept that the methodology of Hizb-ut-Tahrir is according to Islam.
However, if anyone has any knowledge of the problems in the methodology, please do inform me. I intend to post an article on the methodology of the re-establishment of the khilafah soon.
What people claim is wrong with the Aqeedah of this organisation?
Even though, Hizb-ut-Tahrir claims that it accepts the Taqleed of the Salaf-e-Saliheen, they differ somewhat in the Aqeedah. They claim that since ahad ahadith may contain some margin of doubt in them, it is better not to consider them in their Aqeedah or at least avoid some of them. (A detailed article on Taqlid can be seen at http://islamicb.blogspot.com/2009/07/taqlid-is-it-permissible-in-islam.html).
What exactly are Ahad Ahadith?
Ahad ahadith are those ahadith of the Holy Prophet (S) who have been transmitted by a few chain of narrators.
What is the view of the Different Schools of Thought regarding this?
The Ahad or solitary Hadith (also known as Khabar al-Wahid) is the Hadith which fails to fulfil the requirement of Mutawatir. Ahad Hadith may be sound (sahih), good (hasan) or weak (Da’eef). It is a Hadith which does not impart positive knowledge on its own unless it is supported by extraneous or circumstantial evidence.
According to the majority of the four Sunni schools, acting upon Ahad is obligatory even if Ahad fails to engender positive knowledge provided certain conditions are met.
As far as establishing matters of Aqidah is concerned, the majority of the scholars are of the view that Ahad may not be relied upon as the basis of belief (aqidah), for matters of belief must be founded in certainty. Therefore, issues that revolve between belief (iman) and disbelief (kufr) can not be proven by Ahad narrations (Fawatih al-Rahmut, 2/136).
There are a few things which seem controversial. However, I still need to verify most of them. The only one that I have verified is that they consider it permissible to listen to musical instruments. (A detailed article on musical instruments can be seen at http://islamicb.blogspot.com/2009/06/islamic-perspective-of-music-can-it-be.html).
Therefore, we can conclude that the claims of problems in methodology and Aqeedah is based upon invalid arguments.
Submit to Social Websites