Questions for David Myatt

 

These are the replies given recently to various questions submitted to me, via e-mail. The first - in three parts - was in response to a non-Muslim living in England. The second was in response to a question from a Muslim brother, and the third was in response to someone (a former BNP supporter) enquring about Islam.

The text has been slightly edited for publication, and I have added some footnotes to clarify the meaning in a few places. (Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt, 13 Jumaada al-Thaani 1428)
 


Part One
 


CP:
Are you still committed to Islam?

Abdul-Aziz: 
Bismillah.

Yes I am still committed to Islam; I am still a Muslim, Alhamdulillah. For, among other things, there is a principle of personal honour involved. As I mentioned in an interview, last year (part of which interview was printed in an article about me in The Times newspaper):

 
"When we undertake Shahadah - testifying to and declaring our acceptance of Islam before witnesses - we are making a binding oath of loyalty, bayah, on our honour, to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Messenger, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam). This is a life-long oath, loyalty unto death to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and to His Messenger, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam). If we break this oath - if we abandon the duty we have sworn to do - we are being dishonourable.... Over eight years ago, I gave this oath, and it is as binding today as it was then. Thus I cannot, and will not, InshaAllah, break this oath of loyalty."
 

Also, I do regard Deen Al-Islam as far preferable to and indeed superior to the ways of life that exist in the societies of the West today. To use another quote of mine - taken from a letter I wrote a while back to Nick Griffin -


 
� For me, Islam is the supreme, practical, example of honour made manifest in this world. It is also the supreme, practical, example of the numinous - of the sacred, the divine. Why is this? Because Muslims strive to humbly submit to, and to obey, Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala. This produces a genuine reverence, a genuine awareness of the divine, so evident in Salah. But Islam is also practical in a quite simple way - our weaknesses, our strengths, are laid bare, in the Quran, in Ahadith. What all this means in reality is that Islam produces, can produce, and has produced noble, honourable, human beings. It is a simple and practical guide to how we should live - indeed, I would go so far as to say that it is Islam which defines what is civilized. One has only to compare the simple, honest, devout belief of a Mujahid on one of the many modern battlefields with the arrogance of a Western soldier to understand this - to feel this. The practical implementation of Islam, via Shariah and a community of Muslims led by an Ameer or Khalifah, can produce, and has produced in the past, a civilized way of life for thousands - indeed millions - of people, just as we have, in the modern West, the practical implementation of arrogance, of that dishonourable bullying, of that deceit, of that hedonism, that lust for pleasure and so-called "glory", that plunder, which is the mark of the barbarian.�
 


I believe I read something by you (probably on Julie Wright's website) in which you explained how you had come to realise that Islam was not compatible with some of your more fundamental beliefs.  If I recall correctly, you articulated concerns about the "afterlife" aspect of Islam and its claim to universality.  Do you still have doubts about Islam? 

I have gone through several periods of doubt in the last eight or more years, and thus have deeply questioned my commitment, and beliefs and values, several times. This has been difficult, interesting and - in hindsight - quite valuable, a continuation of that process of personal learning which has resulted from several decades of various involvements and experiences. In brief, there has been pathei mathos.

As for my fundamental beliefs, as you call them, these have been refined, over the decades, and in some cases have radically changed. Thus, in my early years, and for quite some time, I advocated racism. Then, as I came to understand National-Socialism better - and as I came to give it a solid ethical foundation based upon honour, loyalty and duty - I moved away from that, as expounded, for example, in the essay Why National-Socialism Is Not Racist. I then began developing what I called The Numinous Way in response to striving to answer questions regarding suffering and the consequences of personal honour, which took me away somewhat from an affirmation of "the State", and of large modern "nations", toward small rural folkish communities and clans, and toward law based upon honour rather than law based upon abstract constructs and abstract ideas. Then - following my reversion to Islam and my decision to support the Mujahideen fighting Zionism, the Zionist so-called "New World Order" and the decadence of the modern West in a practical way - my perspective changed completely, and part of this change involved viewing the struggle against the perfidy of Zionism, and its social-engineering, according to a different perspective (that of Deen Al-Islam) and viewing that struggle in global terms and in terms of a long, difficult, world-wide campaign which would last many, many decades.

As I intimated in some of my personal essays over the decades (including one published when I was involved with C18 and entitled something like "Why I am NS") my main motivation has always been a sense of duty: a desire to do what I regard and regarded as right, and honourable, even though part of me wishes and often has wished for a quiet reclusive rural life "communing with Nature", writing poetry, and so on. Thus, there have been periods, in the last nearly four decades, when I have saught the personal peace brought by such a reclusive rural life - often after some person or other acted dishonourably toward me or toward "the cause", or failed to fulfill some duty they had sworn to do, and so on. In many ways, I was quite naive - even innocent - for a long time. Certainly, I was very idealistic. I really did believe in honesty, truth, and the justness of my cause, and expected others, especially "comrades" to behave decently. Experience - hard experience - made me face the reality of people. For instance, I once had a long correspondence with a certain Martin Webster, in the early seventies, following an incident in which he had lied about something. I insisted that "if our cause is right, then we have no need to lie, or distort the truth..." (or something like that). I can recount dozens of such incidents - some as trivial as the Webster one; others more serious (such as the Policeman who lied under oath and got me sent to Prison; or the comrade who made a deal with the Police; or the comrades who spread untrue rumours about me behind my back, and so on).

But, there are two important things here. Firstly, I have always gone back to doing what I perceived to be my duty, often at some personal cost to myself, my family, my personal relationships. It has been a kind of war of personal attrition - between desiring a quiet (even normal) family, and personal, life, and between being honourable by doing this duty. Secondly, I have always understood (although not quite as rationally as now) that there are perhaps more important things than one's own feelings and desires. It becomes a question of honour, and of perspective, of the very meaning and purpose of our individual life.


Thus - and in respect some doubts I may have personally had in the past year or so - as I recently wrote:
 
"The essential thing to understand, to appreciate, is that one has to sometimes make a difficult decision - either to transcend, to go beyond, the personal and thus act on behalf of, become imbued with, The Numen, or to devote one's self to - in effect to wallow in - personal, emotive, matters. Where does one's meaning ultimately reside? In that-which is beyond, or in that which is personal, and within, which we can explore and to a certain extent manufacture for ourselves and possibly for others via some medium such as personal effusions presenced via essays, poetry and so on? My choice, for the past few years, has been to attempt both, to be both, but in the perspective of centuries, of Life, of the Cosmos, of the truth of Being... it is the former which is the correct and honourable choice, although perhaps only a few individuals will understand what I am talking about here. In simple terms: there are more important things than my own feelings, my own desires, than even my own thoughts and personal conclusions about certain matters." (Out Of The Darkness: Toward the Empathic Essence)


 
Furthermore, in essence, my fundamental belief regarding the true nature of Zionism (and the Zionist social-engineering that has been foistered upon us) has not changed, for I regard the battle, the war, we are currently engaged in as supremely important; in truth, as perhaps the most important conflict we human beings have ever faced. There is dishonour here; real evil, here; real tyranny. One has only to consider the blatant lie of the holocaust, for example, to understand this evil, and the power that the Zionists and their lackeys now have. One has only to consider the utter hypocrisy, the dishonour, the arrogance, of the Amerikans, as they do the bidding of their Zionist masters, when they arrest and torture and hold without trial thousands upon thousands of Muslims, and them shamelessly lie about what they are doing and have done - torturing people for years; injecting them against their will with drugs; humiliating them day after day for years on end, all the while holding up their own decadent, dishonourable, way of life as an "example" for others to admire and follow. What dishonourable cowardly hypocritical bullies.

Thus, faced with such perfidy, what matters is that one fights, effectively, honourably, and I regard Deen Al-Islam as the most effective, the most honourable, way of fighting the dishonour and the evil which we face. Everything else, to me, now, is of secondary importance.

I learnt, from practical experience, many years ago, that those on "the radical Right" would do nothing effective, and could not do anything effective (given their own often dishonourable behaviour and policies) to combat this evil. To quote again from an earlier interview of mine:

 
"In practical terms, of action, little has been achieved, for these so-called "nationalist" political groups, and individuals, do seem to prefer talk and posturing to deeds. Furthermore, a great many, if not the majority, of such "nationalists" - and even those who call themselves National Socialists - are still subsumed by prejudice, just as they are lacking that perspective, that honour, that sense of duty which would see them prepared and ready to sacrifice their own lives. Indeed, the Muslims put them to shame...

There will not be an uprising, a revolution, in any Western nation, by nationalists, racial nationalists, or National-Socialists - because these people lack the desire, the motivation, the ethos, to do this and because they do not have the support of even a large minority of their own folk, let alone a majority of their own folk. Second, that in the foreseeable future no such extreme "right-wing" group, political Party or organization will ever get elected, voted, into power - all that they can hope for is to be a minority Party in some Parliament. Third, that the Establishment, the pro-Zionist system that governs either directly or by proxy in all Western nations will not collapse in the near future. Thus, these groups, organizations and individuals of the so-called "far right" do not pose any real threat to the Western status quo - they are a nuisance; and should they ever become more than that, then the Establishment, the pro-Zionist system, will invoke the full force of "the law", or make new laws, to deal with them. The only serious threat to the current pro-Zionist status quo is, and will remain for the next hundred years or so, Islam."
 


Thus - my effusive, emotive  digression, aside! -  I hope that this answers your questions.

 

Is your commitment to national socialism something that you would never abandon?  (Within all this there is, of course, the question of "race").

My commitment now is to Deen Al-Islam only: or, more correctly, to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Messenger, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam). To striving (InshaAllah) to live according to the Deen which Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala has revealed through His Messenger, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and to striving (InshaAllah) to make this Deen triumphant in this world of ours.

In respect of race, I have touched upon the matter several times over the past two years, for example, in my essay Nationalism, Race, Culture and Islam and in some replies I gave to questions asked of me by Muslims on the IslamicAwakening internet forum.

 
Basically, for a Muslim, race is irrelevant - the criteria of judgement is fidelity to Deen Al-Islam - and the only distinction among people that Muslims make is that of taqwa, of honourably doing the duty we have sworn to do, which is to consider as our brothers and sisters all those who are loyal to, and who do their duty to, Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Messenger, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) regardless of what criteria non-Muslims apply to them, such as race, or place of birth, or social status.

On a personal note, I am most happy in the company of Muslims, of whatever race they are said to belong to - indeed, I am more "at home" among Muslims (who strive to obey Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) than I am among what I once regarded as my own people, for such Muslims have honour, dignity, reverence, manners and humility, qualities sadly lacking among many of the peoples of the West.

Thus, many people - perhaps yourself included - probably regard me as a "traitor". I have certainly been called that by many people on "the far Right" in the last eight years or so.


I read your book, 'Vindex: The Destiny of the West' four or five years ago and I was particularly struck by your thesis concerning Western art, how it should have developed and how it has been distorted.  The value of this, for me, was that you gave specific examples: Part, Ligetti, Orff.  At the time I knew next to nothing of "classical" music, so I got hold of the works you discussed and began to sense something of what you were getting at.  Have you written anything further on this?

I did, years ago, write an essay entitled "A New and Numinous Art" - and that was about all. Life got in the way of theory!



Do you think that any (Western) art is being created today that is free from Culture Distortion?  And, presumably, 'The Logic of History' still stands little chance of publication?

Regarding Western culture, I did write another essay entitled A Question of Numinous Culture.


The Logic of History was never finished. I sent a draft of the first few chapters to a New Zealand friend, years ago, who was going to publish them, but never did. As for the rest, the originals were all lost, probably during one of my many house-moves in the late eighties and early nineties, and a photocopy I gave to a female Serbian friend was also lost, due to certain conditions which existed for a while in the area where she then lived. These things happen (Alhamdulillah) - just as I lost my voluminous line for line commentary on the Agamemnon of Aeschylus, in seven or more large notebooks, and my commentaries on Oedipus and Antigone.


(Yaumul Ithnain 25 Jumaada al-Awal 1428)
 


Part Two

 

One of the things that struck me is the extraordinary degree of consistency with which you have approached the apparently disparate paths that you have followed.  The thing that stood out for me most of all was a striving to experience the sacred, or, as you put it, to presence the numinous.  It seems to me that this striving is the thing that lies behind the paradoxes that many people perceive in your life and work.  You seem to have always been aware that the path is not the destination, that any "system", "religion" or whatever, is a means for enabling us to experience the divine in our world, to presence the numinous. 

It is interesting that you - along with a few other people - do seem to understand my various and diverse peregrinations over the decades.

Which is not to say that the path itself does not matter; indeed, it is only through submission to this path that one may consciously begin to approach God.  And, for a person following a particular path, that path may appear to be "superior, and complete and perfect" (as you describe Islam in 'An Interview with Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt'). 

There is appearance, and there is reality. Is reality dependant upon how we perceive it? Or does it exist independent of us, as Aristotle and modern science, following him, believed? And is God - or Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala) - Reality, with the purpose of our existence being to find and know this Reality? Certainly, many people, whose writings I have studied over the decades, have, in some way or other, believed so.

For a Muslim, it is not a question of perspective or (more precisely) not a question of appearance - it is a question of fitrah: of our natural character, our true nature, as human beings, which is to know and to be in accord with (in other words, to obey and submit to) Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala: to know, feel and understand Tawheed, the Unity, which is numinous. That is, our true nature as human beings is Muslim, and that which takes us away from this is kufr: a concealment of this true nature of ours, which concealment amounts to Ignorance, Jahiliyyah. Often, this concealment is willful: disobedience, hubris. By being Muslim - by reverting to Islam - we are living in accord with the nature of being, of Life, just as, for example, a planet which orbits some star in some Galaxy, is being-in-accord with its nature and in accord with the being of the Cosmos (or, as science might say: it is obeying the laws of physics).

As Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala says in the Quran:

 
"Do you not see how all beings that are in the heavens and on the Earth obey Allah - the sun, the moon, the stars; the hills, the trees, the animals, and even a great number of human beings?" 22:18 Interpretation of Meaning
 



But here, there is a question of perspective: for how can the creator of The Numinous Way talk about Islam as "superior"?  Is this not a narrowing of perspective, a return to abstraction, of feeling pride that one's own religion is better than others? 

Certainly, from the perspective of The Numinous Way, you are correct, and I did indeed spend many months, last year, pondering such questions as this, as briefly expressed in personal ramblings such as How Do We Know In Our Anguish? and All Is Sadness and in other such irrelevant personal effusions. In addition, the essay A Brief Analysis of The Immorality of Abstraction is a brief analysis of the problem of abstraction (of -isms and -ologies) from the perspective of The Numinous Way

As I wrote somewhere, it is a question of personal perspective (see Note 1): of what we as individuals accept or believe in or adhere to or discover or, perhaps more correctly, are led toward discovering [by Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala].


When you write: "my perspective changed completely, and part of this change involved viewing the struggle against the perfidy of Zionism, and its social-engineering, according to a different perspective (that of Deen Al-Islam) and viewing that struggle in global terms and in terms of a long, difficult, world-wide campaign which would last many, many decades," could this be interpreted as a deliberately pragmatic change of perspective? 

That is most certainly one possible interpretation of what I wrote - but I probably should have been more explicit and given more details.

As I mentioned in a previous reply, I regard my Shahadah as on oath of loyalty (bayah) which I took on my honour. This was and is a personal, sacred and life-long commitment - and obedience - to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Messenger, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and not some pragmatic decision that I made after considering various strategies and tactics in the conflict against the perfidy of Zionism and Zionist social-engineering.

The consequences of this bayah are simple, one of which is that I regard my own desires, feelings, and ponderings about life (or whatever) to be of secondary importance or irrelevant to doing my duty as a Muslim, which duty includes to strive (InshaAllah) to know and implement in my own life the commands of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala (manifest in Quran, Sunnah and Shariah); to strive to enjoin the honourable and forbid the dishonourable (defined as these are according to Quran, Sunnah and Shariah); to strive to replace kufr (which kufr includes the ignorance of the kuffar) with Deen Al-Islam; and to strive to defend my brothers and sisters if they are oppressed or are treated in a dishonourable way.

Perhaps I should further add that the Zionist social-engineering - which I attempted to briefly analyze in "Vindex - The Destiny of the West" and other writings and which term I defined, used and use in a specific way - is one manifestation of kufr, of Ignorance, of hubris: an attempt (to use the terminology of the West) to manufacture concepts and ideas and then use those concepts and ideas as a means of social, personal and political control. In terms of Deen Al-Islam, it is an attempt to have us accept, worship, bow-down to and obey, Tawagheet (idols): a Taghut such as what is called "democracy", the nation-State, kaffir-law, liberalism, and so on.


Again, you write: "I regard Deen Al-Islam as the most effective, the most honourable, way of fighting the dishonour and the evil which we face. Everything else, to me, now, is of secondary importance."  So, the battle against Zionism is of fundamental importance to you; but is Islam, as some have suggested, merely an efficient means for you to continue this battle?

That is an interpretation which, as you mention, others have suggested and which some individuals accept. Again, I probably should have gone into more detail and should perhaps have written: Everything else - in respect of my own personal life - is of secondary importance compared to the Jihad against those, such as Zionists and their Crusader allies and apostate lackeys in the so-called and mis-named "New World Order" (aka the Zionist-Crusader alliance) who demand we Muslims bow down to and obey their idols, their Tawagheet (such as "democracy" and the nation-State) and who demand that we abandon our simple, honourable, obedience to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Messenger, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) - and our duty of Jihad - and instead embrace and accept the tame moderate so-called "Islam" which they and their apostate allies have manufactured as part of their plan to dominate us and this world.

Personally, I accept - as I previously mentioned - that Deen Al-Islam is the perfect Way of Life for we human beings: that it is far superior to each and every way of the West, which ways include National-Socialism and even The Numinous Way which I began to develope and which I once regarded as the esoteric and ethical essence of all folkish ways, including National-Socialism.

In essence, Deen Al-Islam is my life - the way of a natural balance; the way of honour; the way of the noble warrior - and the quintessence of this Way of Life is a simple, honourable, loyalty and obedience to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Messenger, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam).

I trust this answers your questions and makes my own position somewhat clearer.


 
I read your essay, 'Nationalism, Race, Culture and Islam' with some interest.  It is a very lucid account of the subject from an Islamic perspective.  I do not share that perspective, but I can respect those who do.

Which is exactly the perspective of The Numinous Way, and to a certain extent also of genuine National-Socialism, with both of these Ways expressing the view that the folk is an expression of the difference and diversity of Nature - of the presencing-of-life in this small part of the Cosmos - and that this difference and diversity should be celebrated, conserved and evolved in an honourable way, which basically means, for The Numinous Way, that intentional suffering is and should be avoided. (See Note 2)

One reason - as I have mentioned elsewhere - that I continued, after my reversion to Deen Al-Islam, to co-operate with some people involved with, for example,  The Numinous Way (and thus to aid the development of The Numinous Way) was to assist understanding and co-operation between Muslims and honourable non-Muslims in the hope of combating in whatever way the Zionist-Crusader alliance.


I believe that different religions are distinct expressions of the same eternal truths, and are related to particular groups of people, or races.  The problem has often been that universalist religions seem to find it difficult to tolerate anyone who will not conform to their own revealed truth.  As a heathen, I would prefer other people to follow their own ways and allow me to follow mine.


Again, such a viewpoint is fundamental to The Numinous Way, which espouses tolerance, and respect. Of course, if someone is intolerant toward you (or your family and kin) on a personal, individual, basis, one is not expected - according to the ethics of The Numinous Way - to "turn the other cheek" or put into practice the non-violence of, for example, Buddhism. Rather, one reacts honourably - according to the ethic of personal honour; that is, according to the ethic of the genuine gentleman, the noble warrior.


Incidentally, you wrote: "Thus, many people - perhaps yourself included - probably regard me as a "traitor"".  For what its worth, I do not regard you as such; but perhaps I could turn it around somewhat and ask you, how you, as a Muslim, regard heathens such as myself?

If a Muslim is striving to follow Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammaah - and thus using only the criteria of Quran and Sunnah for judgement - then they would be well-mannered and honourable, providing such manners and honour were reciprocated. That has always been the Muslim way (see Note 3).

However, if there is disrespect, or bad manners, or intolerance or hatred, toward the Muslim and/or toward Muslims in general, then there can be no such respect shown, as is clear from the following quote from the Quran:

 
"Allah does not forbid you from treating honourably those who do not act against you because of your Deen, or who have not driven you from your dwellings, for Allah loves those who act with honour. But Allah forbids you from treating with respect, or befriending, those who act against you because of your Deen, or have driven you from your dwellings or aided others to do this - for those of you who do this are without honour." 60: 8-9 Interpretation of Meaning
 

The reality of the present is that the Zionists and their lackeys - who currently of course include Bush and Blair and Brown - demand that we Muslims accept the Tawagheet of the West and refuse to allow us to have a land of our own where we can live, as Muslims, ruled by an Ameer (a leader) who rules according to Shariah only: a land not dominated by the West. Of course, in their utter hypocrisy, in their dishonour, these lackeys talk and write about bringing "freedom" and "fighting terrorism" and "bringing civilization" when what they mean is: (1) bringing a new colonial domination and oppression, with the "freedom" to believe only what they deem is acceptable to them; (2) fighting, killing, torturing, imprisoning and brainwashing those who oppose their plans; and (3) bringing the decadent, dishonourable ways of the modern West to everyone, which ways they, in their utter arrogance and prejudice, believe are superior. The "tolerance" of these lackeys extends only to those who accept these ignorant, dishonourable, ways of theirs.

As I have written elsewhere, there is indeed a great clash involved here, exemplified most clearly by the Taliban. For those Muslims who understand, the Taliban represent genuine Islam - which is based upon the perspective of Jannah, with this mortal life (and all its delights and pleasures) being only of secondary importance. That is, the Taliban express the fundamental if rather neglected principle of Zuhd in Dunya - the sacred, and honour, are more important than worldly possessions, than personal happiness.

The scorn of many people in the West toward the Taliban is indicative of their own Western arrogance, prejudice, and of their ignorance of Deen Al-Islam. Thus, such people regard the Taliban as "backward", and they regarded the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan under Mullah Umar (hafidhahullah) as "uncivilized" and a step back into "the dark ages" or whatever. That is, they judged and judge the Taliban according to the values, the concepts, of the West believing such values, such concepts, in their ignorance, to be "universal". Thus did they and do they accept that is "right" for the West to interfere in Afghanistan, to kill and imprison and torture Muslims, so that the poor ignorant Muslims can be enlightened and given "progess" and "democracy" (i.e. the corrupt hypocritical tyranny of the West) and given the benefits of the West (such as liberalism, dishonour, decadence, bad-manners, drug-addiction and crime-infested communities).

Now, I know that the majority of the Taliban are honourable: noble warriors whose desire is to live a simple, honourable, life in accord with the commands of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala. It is almost as if they belong to "another world" - as if they hark back to a time when life was simpler; when it was good (in the sense of honourable, noble); when people knew what was and is really important about life. And of course they do belong to a different world, to a different time, from the modern world: they belong to the world of Deen Al-Islam; to the time of the Prophet (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) at Madinah. Being with such people - sharing a simple meal with them, praying with them - thus feeling, knowing, their loyalty, their honour, their uncomplicated commitment to enjoining the honourable and forbidding the dishonourable, is a reminder of this other world: the world of the sacred, of the numinous, of Tawheed; a reminder of what it is that the West, in its hubris, has lost; which is why, of course, the arrogant, materialistic Zionist-Crusader alliance invaded Afghanistan and is trying so hard to destroy the Taliban and why so many Muslims, world-wide, support the Taliban and want to see the arrogant infidels of the West, and their apostate lackeys, defeated.

 


Regarding culture, you seem to have become more pessimistic about the possibility of the conditions necessary for the creation of the Western Imperium being manifested.  Is Vindex dead?

The peoples of the West have significantly changed in the last fifty or so years. The England I knew as a youth, fresh from a life in the Far East and Africa - the England my father and my grandfather thought they fought in two World Wars for - has almost disappeared. Manners have been replaced with arrogant selfishness; gentlemanly (and lady-like) self-effacement and modesty has been replaced by loutish behaviour in public and in private; and restraint has given way to decadence, greed and self-indulgence. Honour is almost completely lacking, in public and in private. Liberalism, Zionist social-engineering, and other things have done their work, so that the West is now the domain of Homo Hubris: of the arrogant, the preening, the dishonourable human being who is intolerant of, or unmindful of, the numinous, which numinous is, in truth, the genesis of honour and of manners and of all the civilizing virtues.

A good illustration here is the furore over Salman Rushdie. He has defiled what is regarding by many as sacred - he has over-stepped the limits of appropriate, of civilized, behaviour. That is, there are still people today who feel, who adhere to, what is sacred; still people whose very daily lives are imbued with the sacred, and who are thus civilized in the correct sense of that term. Still people who are deeply offended by such defilement of the sacred. What does the West do? It reveres this defiler of the sacred; it rewards him; just as the majority of the people of the West do not even understand what is being done here, so far removed are they from the numinous, from honour, from a genuine insight into and understanding of Life.

Given that the West is the abode of the myth of the holocaust, of Homo Hubris - not the abode of honourable warriors as it still was to some extent even during World War Two when hundreds of thousands of people fought under and believed in the motto Meine Ehre Heist Treue - the prospect of Vindex leading a revolt of such honourable warriors against the Zionists and their lackeys now seems rather remote. I might be wrong - but my thirty years or so of experience of practical politics, of people involved with the so-called "extreme Right", has left me with a great knowing of the type of people involved. Furthermore, who understands, in the West, the essence, the intent, of Vindex? Who feels the numinous to such an extent that they would arise as leader to enthuse others: who could so enthuse others? And what would Vindex desire to achieve? Imperium? Which is what other than an Empire based upon honour which restores to us the genuine ethos of the warrior, which seeks excellence and which respects and reveres the numinous?

Which leads us back to the concept, the idea, of race. Is this concept, this idea important - as I once believed? No, I do not believe it is important - for even during the time I espoused, in public, racist views and regarded "the Aryan" as the superior "race" I always respected people of other cultures, other races, and always strove to deal with them in an honourable way. I also knew - from personal experience and from my travels and my experiences of growing-up in Africa and the Far East - that peoples of other cultures, of other "races" could be and often were honourable, civilized; indeed, I could cite many examples of how many of them possessed more virtues, more honour, were better individuals, than many of what I then regarded as my own people. But for a long time I doggedly clung onto and believed in the concept of race and racial superiority until further travels, further experiences - and especially meetings with Muslims before my reversion to Islam - caused me to deeply question my own fundamental beliefs and the ideology I, at the time out of honour, still adhered to.

What I gradually discovered in the years leading toward my reversion to Islam was that the numinous is presenced in Deen Al-Islam, and that it is Deen Al-Islam which today as in the past produces honourable, modest, individuals who possess manners, who respect what is sacred, and who thus are civilized. In addition, who are the honourable warriors of today other than the Mujahideen who fight against often overwhelming odds and who prefer death to dishonour? What kind of community - "society" - would and could Deen Al-Islam create were such honourable warriors to be triumphant? Would they not build a Khilafah led by an Ameer, a Khalifah (a leader) and would this Khilafah not be everything I once dreamed an Imperium might be, and might not this Khilafah be an example to others as the Khilafah in Al-Andulus was to the barbarians of Europe, and might it not, its enemies defeated, reach out toward the stars and so establish a new and Galactic Empire? Thus, as I wrote in an autobiographical essay:

 
"As for my dream, my life-long vision, of a Galactic Empire - of the exploration and settlement of Outer Space -  there was a time, not that long ago, when I came to the conclusion that we human beings were too ignoble, too barbaric, too uncivilized, to do this, and that, if we did undertake such adventures beyond the Earth, we would only be spreading dishonour: spreading our disease of hubris, spreading our destruction of the Numinous. But now - now as I veer toward the sixth decade of my life - I  feel that we can avoid such things: that there is a cure for the disease of hubris and of dishonour, and that were we to be cured - and thus return to our natural fitrah - then we could and perhaps should so venture forth, under the banner of Deen Al-Islam."



(Yaumul Jumma 6 Jumaada al-Thaani 1428)

 

Part Three
 



 
You say that, "the Taliban represent genuine Islam".  Now, I do not doubt that the Taliban have been severely maligned in the West, but before the US occupation of Afghanistan the Taliban were responsible for the destruction of the two giant Buddha statues.  This destruction could be seen as indicative of the intolerance Islam has for other religions, and does seem to contradict the impression you gave that Islam is respectful towards other religions. 


What the West and its apostate lackeys think or believe about the Taliban and their actions - and what they use to base their kaffir opinions on - are irrelevant. One has to go beyond all the Zionist-Crusader rhetoric, lies and propaganda in order to understand the context and the truth of what occurred. The context was two-fold. First, the issue of the sanctions which the West imposed on Afghanistan, then one of the poorest countries in the world. The United Nations announced that it would give money to aid or support the protection of the restoration of the statues while many people in Afghanistan, as a result of the harsh, punitive sanctions imposed by the arrogant hypocritical West, were starving and dying of starvation. Many of the Taliban thus regarded this offer of aid for such statues as an insult, with the West and its lackeys seeming to favour such statues over the lives of Muslims. Second, this gave impetus to the campaign to destroy the statues, which some Ulaamah in Afghanistan at the time regarded as idols which could, according to Quran and Sunnah, be destroyed if they were or had become a focus to divert people away from the path of Deen Al-Islam and thus from what is really important about life - which is Jannah; which is honour; and not this world, and not the preservation, at the cost of human lives, of some artefacts. Certainly, the statues had become the focus for "international attention" and thus became a type of idol for many - and the Taliban decided to make a point (about the hypocrisy of the West and sanctions, and about Deen Al-Islam) which of course, the West and its apostate lackeys in the West and in some Muslims lands, either did not understand or choosed to deliberately mis-understand and use as part of their on-going propaganda campaign against the Taliban.

In addition, note that the Taliban never destroyed any places of worship - and neither would they have done, for as Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala says:

 
"There should be no coercion concerning a Way of Life." 2:256 Interpretation of Meaning
 

Was the destruction of the Buddhas in accordance with Islamic teaching or were the Taliban in error?  If such iconoclasm is in accord with Islamic teaching, can we look forward to similar acts of destruction in countries where Muslims are now settling in large numbers?

What is often forgotten about Deen Al-Islam, or not understood, is that there is no "Islamic teaching" about such matters because there is no worldly central authority, and no dogma, in Deen Al-Islam. That is, each situation, each case, and such matters as you mention, are assessed locally by local Ulaamah and/or an Ameer, using the guidelines of Quran, Sunnah and thus Shariah. Action proceeds on the basis of such local informed guidance. Thus, an Ameer (or Khalifah) would consult with Ulaamah, and others who might have specific knowledge about a certain matter, and he then would make a decision based on the advice given. That is, a specific decision, or course of action, taken by an Ameer results from his own personal judgement, and from the advice given to him by Ulaamah and those who are involved in the matter or who possess knowledge of the matter in question. It does not result from following some rigid dogma or from pursuing in some sort of zealous way his own hawah (desires/goals/agenda).

This Muslim way - the heart of Shariah - is a very civilized, a very human, way of doing things, and once again is a way, a means of doing things, which is far superior to each and every way of the arrogant West.

To quote from an article I wrote about Siyasah:
 

An Ameer also gives bayah - to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam), to be responsible for those whom he leads. It is a sacred trust. This bayah, and the honour upon which it is based, allow for the exercise of personal judgement in practical matters - that is, the Ameer-ul-Mumineen, the Khalifah, and the Khilafah in general, are human; they do not allow themselves to be governed by too many rules and regulations, for it is their Islam, their submission to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam), their honour, their loyalty, and the judgement which arises from these, which are important, not human-made rules and regulations. That is, an official, a representative, of the Khalifah is expected to be an honourable individual, devoted to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam), who is allowed, even expected, to use their own judgement, always basing that judgement on the Quran and Sunnah and always aware of how they will be called to account, by Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala, for their actions.

This principle of personal judgement - this lack of over-burdening rules and regulations - this humanity, is evident, for example, in the rule of Umar ibn al-Khattab (Radhiallahu 'anhu) as recorded in the many Ahadith concerning him (see also Tarikh al-Khulafa by Jalal-uddin As-Suyut). It is evident in the Hadith regarding Mu'adh ibn Jaba (narrated by Abu Musa):

When Allah's Messenger (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) sent him and Mu'adh bin Jabal to Yemen, he said to them: "Make things easy for the people rather than difficult; provide them with reports of good, and do not let them turn away [from what is honourable]. You should both work together, with mutual respect, understanding and loyalty." Bukhari, Vol 8, Book 73, Number 145

Thus, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) - after entrusting them with the duty of ruling Yemen - did not go into great detail about what they should do, or provide them with detailed plans or burden them with regulations. Instead, he trusted them to act, to behave, as Muslims - with honour, fairness, and with the knowledge that they would be held accountable by Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala for their deeds.

This makes the practical implementation of Siyasah - the Khilafah - very different from the Western State with its abstract loyalty, its bureaucracy, its ever more powerful Police forces, its ever-increasing human-made, fallible, laws, and its remote politicians who pander to some passing idea, some trendy philosophy, or some human-made, fallible, ever-changing, "political programme" and who often lie, and use propaganda, in order to manipulate people, and secure their vote in some election.

For Islam, the supreme authority, the supreme judge, is Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala, and representatives of the Khilafah - from the Khalifah (Ameer-ul-Mumineen), to each and every Qadi, to each and every Ameer who has given bayah to the Khalifah - are only intermediaries, striving to do their honourable duty, and allowed to do their duty by virtue of the trust that has been placed in them. As intermediaries between Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and the Muslims, they are expected to act in accordance with the Quran and Sunnah, and with honour, with fairness, and often with mercy, with forgiveness, for as Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala says:

"Remember that Allah is The Most Merciful, He Who Often Forgives."   5:34 Interpretation of Meaning

"Hukm is for Allah alone." 6:57 Interpretation of Meaning



Thus, it is impossible to give or issue specific answers to theoretical questions concerning what an Ameer might due in some future theoretical scenario. So, would a future Khalifah sanction the destruction of what the West would or might consider "cultural objects or artefacts"? Possibly not; possibly yes, in some particular circumstances, if a valid reason existed and if such an action was considered, by local Ulaamah, as in accordance with the Quran and Sunnah.

Furthermore, one might have the situation that one Ameer at one time might choose a certain course of action, and another Ameer at another time might choose another different course of action. The history of Muslim lands - the history of the Khilafah - has many such examples, just as a Qadi (a Muslim judge in a Shariah Court) in reaching a judgement about a specific case always follows the general guidelines of Quran and Sunnah and applies these to the individual circumstances which pertain at the time. That is, such Muslim justice is human; flexible and honourable; in complete contrast to the almost inhuman inflexible so-called "justice" of the West based on abstract human-manufactured, fallible, and constantly changing laws.



In respect of the Taliban, they have always striven to follow the guidance of the Quran and the Sunnah - that is, whatever they have done has been done because the advice of Ulaamah was being followed, or because an Ameer (such as Mullah Omar, hafidhahullah) had taken a decision after consulting with Ulaamah and others. That does not make them infallible - they may mistakes mistakes, as all Muslims (including some of the Mujahideen) make mistakes sometimes. But, for Muslims, actions are judged by intention - and their intention was and is to obey only Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala: to use only the criteria of Quran and Sunnah as the basis for their judgement because they look to Jannah rather than to the rewards of this world.

In the particular circumstances pertaining at the time in Afghanistan, the judgement that was made was made with due respect for the Shariah principles involved. At another time, under different circumstances, it is possible that another judgement might be made by another Ameer, following advice from other Ulaamah. As to whether, in this particular matter on this particular occasion, and according to Shariah, they were in error, then, as often with Muslims, there is some divergence of opinion, with some inclining toward the view that were correct (with, for instance, the statues having become idols again by virtue of the Western propaganda campaign directed at the Taliban in respect of this issue) and others inclining toward the view that the Taliban may have been mistaken. I incline toward the view that they were correct, wa Allahu Alam.

Whatever the opinion of Muslims about this particular matter, there is no dispute at all that aiding the West against the Taliban - whatever reasons or excuses are given - is wrong, a dishonourable betrayal of one's brothers and sisters, contrary to Deen Al-Islam. Such a betrayal - such co-operation with the kuffar - is clear kufr and one of the actions that nullifies a person's Islam, and makes them an apostate.



If your vision of a Galactic Empire under a new Khilafah were to come to pass, would it seek the destruction of any alien religions it might come across in distant Solar systems, or would it accept that such alien religions are free to worship their own Gods?  Would such aliens who had not heard of the Prophet's message be suffering from "kufr" and therefore benefit from reversion to Islam?

According to Deen Al-Islam - or more correctly, according to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala - there are only Muslims and those who do not believe; only Truth (Haqq), and Falsehood (Baatil). Only Kufr and Islam. Only Tawheed and Ignorance. The two are distinct, as Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala says:

 
"Haqq has been distinguished from Baatil - and those who renounce and denounce Taghut and then believe in Allah have grasped that trustworthy hand-hold that never breaks." 2:256 Interpretation of Meaning
 
Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala also says:
"Fight against those who do not believe in Allah, or in The Last Day, and who do not forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, as well as those among the people of the book who do not acknowledge the Deen of Truth, and fight them until they pay the Jizya with willing submission." 9:29 interpretation of Meaning
 
"The kuffar are your declared enemy." � 4: 101  Interpretation of Meaning
 

We. as Muslims, are duty bound to take The Message, of Deen Al-Islam, the promise (InshaAllah) of Jannah, to those who do not believe - through Dawah, and through Jihad Fee Sabilillah. That is, we offer the Unbelievers, the kuffar, a choice - accept Deen Al-Islam, or pay the Jizya. In practical terms, we say to them: take an oath of loyalty to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and to His Prophet (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and thus become Muslim or take an oath of loyalty (make a binding contract between us and you) that you will not interfere in our affairs, that you will not offend Muslims or seek to change our Deen, that you will go peaceably about your own business (which includes worshipping in your own way) and that you will pay the Jizya, in which case we will honourably protect you.

Many examples could be given of the civilizing nature of this offer, of the honourable contracts involved: for example how, during the time of the Western Crusades in Filistine, many Nazarenes and Jews saught the protection of the Muslims against what they regarded as the barbarism of the Crusaders; or how Nazarenes (and Jews) in Al-Andalus prospered.


In addition, I refer you to my previous answer, above - that is, the particulars involved in such eventualities would be a matter for those involved, who would seek to arrive at a specific course of action based on following the guidance of Quran and Sunnah.

The problem today, of course, is that the Jews and Nazarenes and their lackeys and allies are interfering in our affairs - and have been doing so for well over a hundred years. They will not allow us to have a land of our own where we can establish our Muslim way of life and live according to Shariah, just as they demand that we abandon Deen Al-Islam (and thus our honour and our duty of Jihad) for the moderate, tame, domestic, religion of so-called "Islam" that they manufactured for us, which moderate religion enables them to continue with their domination, their arrogance, their hypocrisy, their dishonour. As Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala says:

 
"The Jews and Nazarenes will never be satisfied with you until they have changed your Deen." 2: 120 Interpretation of Meaning
 
"Do they seek honour from the kuffar? In truth, honour is with, and from, Allah alone." 3: 139 Interpretation of Meaning
 

So, we fight - through Jihad Fee Sabilillah - as Muslims to free our lands from their control and dominance and influence, and in order to establish Deen Al-Islam: to raise the Word of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala through a Khilafah.

 
"You who believe! If anyone turns away from this Deen, then Allah will replace that person with many whom He loves, who love Him - those who are loyal to the Believers, stern toward the kuffar, who fight in the Way of Allah, and who do not heed the criticism of their critics. For this is the honour that He bestows upon whomsoever He wills - for Allah is The All-Knowing, The Infinite One. In truth, your champions are Allah, His Messenger, and the Believers - those who undertake As-Salat, who give Zakat and who submit [in loyalty to Allah]. For whomsoever has Allah, His Messenger, and Believers as their Champion, are the ones who will achieve victory."   5: 54-56 Interpretation of Meaning

Certainly, as you may (InshaAllah) have gathered, Deen Al-Islam, correctly understood, is not the Way of peacefully enduring oppression or of allowing dishonourable bullies and arrogant tyrants to dominate our lands or spread their Ignorance and decadence among the Muslims and the world. Rather, it is the Way of standing up for and fighting for what is honourable; and fighting not from any personal motive or from any personal desire or thought of worldly gain, but because it is the human thing to do: that which is in accord with our natural nature, our fitrah, which is to act, to be, in accord with Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala; to know the beauty, the purity, of Tawheed. From this knowing flows all those things which makes us human: honour, dignity, manners, modesty; reverence for the numinous, and that true equality and true justice which Deen Al-Islam has made real in this world. Thus, there is genuine freedom here: to be what we really are, mortals whose brief temporal and often strife-filled lives are but a means to the eternal and true peace of Jannah.

 
"And there shall be conflict between you while you dwell, resting for a while, on Earth which shall provide for you." (2: 36 Interpretation of Meaning)


Whatever good that may have been written is from Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala, and whatever mistakes or errors have been made are from me.



Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt
Yaumul Jumma 13 Jumaada al-Thaani 1428

 

 


 
SJ:
As Salaam Alaykum

 
Abdul-Aziz:
Walaikum Salaam Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatu


What is your current position on alliances with Neo-Nazis?

My view - as I explained in an interview last year (part of which interview appeared in The Times newspaper) - is that Deen Al-Islam is perfect, and superior to each and every way of the West, which includes every "ideology" such as National-Socialism and even "The Numinous Way" which I spent several years developing.

Our aim, as Muslims, is of course to strive to obey Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Prophet and Messenger (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) - to reject the Tawagheet of the kuffar, to strive InshaAllah for Jannah, and to strive to make the Word of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala supreme in the dunya. As for co-operation between ourselves and some of the kuffar (such as National-Socialists) - there are several questions to answer, such as: is the seeking of such co-operation correct (according to Quran and Sunnah); what are we hoping InshaAllah to achieve, what do they hope for; how do we deal with them, and how do they view us, as Muslims who seek to establish the rule of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala through a Khilafah and thus according to Shariah?

As you know, the view I inclined toward for several years was that such co-operation was permissible, according to Quran and Sunnah, provided certain conditions pertained, such as them acting honourably toward Muslims, and viewing Deen Al-Islam at best as a numinous Way of Life and at worst in an not unfavourable way, and such as us who are seeking such co-operation not accepting their Tawagheet or doing anything which harms any Muslim, for we must always favour the Muslims before any kaffir. They also must be aware of what it is that we seek - which is Khilafah, an end to their interference in our affairs, and the triumph of Deen Al-Islam.

In practical terms, of Dawah, there has been some success, Alhamdulillah - for this has led to some people on the so-called "extreme Right" revising their opinion about Deen Al-Islam and Muslims, and has led some to abandon their racism and prejudice. It has also led to a few such people reverting to Islam.

However, there have been many problems, and I have come to revise my own view on the question of co-operation, partly as a result of these many problems and partly as a result of understanding that we do not need such co-operation from such people, many of whom have been and are reluctant to work with Muslims whom they classify as "non-White" or "not Aryan", many of whom still retain their prejudice of believing that "the West" (or Aryan culture) is superior to Deen Al-Islam, and all of whom worship the Taghut of "race and nation".

Essentially, we need Imaan, Dawah and Jihad: which means we know, accept and feel in our hearts the truth about the perfection and superiority of Deen Al-Islam, thus rejecting every Taghut of the kuffar; that we desire to make this truth known among the kuffar; and that we desire to make the Word of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala supreme in this world, by Jihad to expel the kuffar from our lands, to establish Khilafah, to free all Muslims held in kaffir prisons. In respect of the so-called "extreme Right", this means we want them to revert to Deen Al-Islam - to reject the Taghut of "race and nation" - to thus discover their true nature, their fitrah, as Muslims who bow down to only Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and who are thus prepared to undertake Jihad as Muslims.

Thus, such co-operation is not necessary. What this means is us acting on the basis of Tawheed; on the basis of Taqwa. From a position of strength: as someone who has found and who knows the beauty and the truth that is Deen Al-Islam, and who knows and feels the reward that this, InshaAllah, will bring.


Jazakallahu khayran for your efforts on behalf of Deen Al-Islam and particularly for your support of the Mujahideen who are fighting the dishonourable kuffar.

Do you know Qunoot e Nazilla? This du'a can be recited after Rukoo in the last Rak'aat of Namaz especially when the Muslim Ummah is engaged in conflict with infidels as now. Our beloved Prophet (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) offered this du'a for the success of the Mujahideen and for the defeat of the disbelievers. According to some Ulaamah, it should be recited only at Fajr Namaz; according to others, it should be said during Fajr Namaz for a whole month in times of conflict (Nazilla by the way means "great misfortune"). There are several versions of this du'a, and the following English version I learnt, years ago, from a Brother in Pakistan.


 
Allahummah! Forgive us, and forgive all the true Believers, men and women, and all Muslims, men and women, and make them all as brothers and sisters to each other. End our disputes, and aid us against our enemies.

Allahummah! Curse the kuffar who oppress the Muslims and who prevent them from following Your Deen.

Allahummah! Create disputes and differences between the kuffar and make them lose heart, and punish them with that torment which You will use against those who disobey You.

Allahummah! We seek Your help against them and seek Your protection from their ignoble deeds.

Allahummah! We leave You to judge Yahud and Nazarenes, just as we know You are the final judge of all disbelievers.

Allahummah! Destroy our enemies: those who oppose our Way of Life. Destroy their homes, disrupt their unity and their peace, and bring all kinds of devastation and destruction to them.

Allahummah! Help and assist the Mujahideen. Help and protect them as a strong Ameer would help and protect them. Make their aim true so that they hit their targets, and provide them with strength.
 
Qunot Nazilla
 




Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt
Yaumul Ahad 1 Jumaada al-Thaani 1428



 

NH: Your writings have drawn me to Islam I am thinking of converting but i have some questions. My question to you is, Why Islam?


Abdul-Aziz:

All Praise and All Thanks are for Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala

The simple answer is that I found Islam to be the most honourable, the most civilized, the most numinous - and the most human - Way of Life I have ever known, experienced or studied. I was impressed with the Muslims I met, before my own reversion to Islam - by their manners, their behaviour, their general attitude.

To quote something I rather enthusiastically wrote a few weeks after my own conversion in 1998:


 

"What I understood about Islam and what I always strive to remember about Islam, is that the wisdom so evident in the middle way which is Islam is far, far beyond what I once regarded as my own wisdom, my own understanding, and far beyond the wisdom, the understanding, shown by all the sages, all the religious teachers, all the philosophers, I have studied over a period of thirty or more years.

In truth, I came to believe there is something special here: something divine. That is, that the Way of Islam itself has been divinely given to us. I could not, before my conversion, understand how an ordinary man - the Prophet Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) - who could neither read nor write, could have devised such a noble, such a human, such a perfect, Way."




What it is about this faith, rather than all of the others, that has gripped you? What is it about Islamic culture, law and the way of life that has so spoken to your heart  and soul over ours?

Basically, Islam is a true middle-way. It is simple both in practice and in theory, and is an easy Way for we fallible, error-prone, human beings to become better individuals. Consider, for instance, prayer - Salat (also called Namaz). This is always short, and easy to do. It is a combination of words, gestures and movement - unlike any other form of prayer such as Nazarene, Buddhist, heathen. Even the "sermon" (khuttbah) at Friday communal prayers is expected to be fairly short, so as not to bore people or tire them. Thus, such prayer is very human - it recognizes our human nature. In my life, I have experienced and performed many types of prayer - from Buddhist to Taoist to Anglican, to Catholic (including those of Benedictine and Carthusian monasticism) to Hinduism - and of all of them I found Namaz to be both the most human and the most numinous, the most imbued with the Divine, for we prostrate ourselves before God, knowing ourselves for the weak individuals we are. One of the many remarkable things I remember about Islam is when, only a short while after my own conversion, I went to travel again in the Desert, and it was so poignant doing Namaz there, with no one around for hundreds of miles: saying the same words, and praying in the same way, as the Prophet Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) had done, over one thousand and four hundred years ago; for alone, in the Desert, one can feel the closeness of God, of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala - feel how slender is the thread by which we cling to life. One can sense the true Peace that is Jannah (Paradise) and the wonder of Life, of Creation. As it says in the Quran:

 
"Allah (alone) has power over, and is the (sole) master of, all things. The creations in Heaven and Earth, the very change of Night to Day, are Signs for those gifted with intelligence, those who whether sitting, standing or reclining on their sides, give praise to Allah and who frequently recall these creations in Heaven and Earth, (saying): 'You who are our Rabb - You created all these things for a purpose; the achievement is Yours alone.' " (3:189-191 Interpretation of Meaning)
 

Another example I can give is the sensible, civilized, guidelines which Islam provides for our personal behaviour. Thus, women are asked to be modest, in public - to wear Hijab; to lower their gaze; to not be alone with a man to whom they are not related (non-Mahram) and so on. Men have to respect women, and there is etiquette involved when they meet. This is the Islamic, the civilized, the honourable, way for people to behave and be - for it removes most if not all of the temptations to which we fallible human beings are prey, temptations (often resulting from sexual desire) which can make for complicated and unhappy personal relationships and which lead to an unhappy if not decadent society. Another example is the prohibition on drugs and intoxicating drink - for such things make us unccivilized, just as they cause much unhappiness and many problems for individuals, for society.



What inspired you towards Islam?

As I mentioned, I was impressed by the Muslims I met on various travels (such as in Egypt and elsewhere) and by Deen Al-Islam itself. I was also particularly impressed by the life of the last Prophet, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) who seemed to me to be the embodiment of the best human being: modest, devout, honourable, generous. There is a brief over-view of his life at www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/prophet/profbio.html


Any help that you can offer would be greatly appreciated.

May I suggest that you speak, in person, to some knowledgeable Muslims, such as the Imaam of a Mosque near you, or, if you prefer, you can contact the New Muslims Project at www.newmuslimsproject.net where you can communicate with, speak to and meet other English converts. The project also has support groups in various areas.


I would also suggest that - if you have not done so already - you read an English interpretation of the Quran and some Ahadith [which are narrations regarding the life of the Prophet, Muhammad, salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam]. There is a good Quran site at www.universalunity.net/quran4/index.htm and in respect of Ahadith a good place to begin is with An-Nawawi's Ahadith, which are on-line at fortyhadith.iiu.edu.my/hadiths.htm

In addition - and I know this may be obvious - Muslims are human: they differ in personality; they are fallible, can make mistakes; some may even be rude. So if and when you met and mix with them you may well find varying degrees of adherence to the Quran and Sunnah: to the Way of Islam. But the truth is that if people - born into a Muslim family, or converts - strive to adhere to the guidelines given in the Quran and the Sunnah and thus in Shariah, then they will (InshaAllah) be better people: noble, honourable, modest individuals who respect and revere what is sacred and who will thus be among the best of human beings.


Thus, I invite you to Islam: to accept the most honourable, the best, Way of Life. To become a Muslim, one has only to recite the Shahadah - preferably, but not necessarily, before two Muslims as witness. The Shahadah - The Testimony of Faith - is:
 
Ashadu-an la ilaaha il-la-lah, wa ashadu-anna Muhammadan rasoolu-lah
 
Which is Arabic for: I testify that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is His Messenger. (See Note 4)



Whatever good that may have been written is from Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala, and whatever mistakes or errors have been made are from me.
 


8 Jumaada al-Thaani 1428

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt


 


Notes:

(1) For a Muslim, the perspective is of striving to be in accord with Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala - and how we can do this was revealed to us by the Prophet, Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and is manifest to us in Quran and Sunnah and thus in Shariah. This striving to be in accord with Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala is the true meaning of peace in the dunya, and the true meaning of the submission and obedience which is Deen Al-Islam. If we thus return to our true, Muslim, nature, we have emerged from the darkness of kufr and may thus be granted, InshaAllah, the eternal peace of Jannah. Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala says:

 
"Therefore be honourable: let (this) Deen be your aim, the fitrah given by Allah. What Allah creates, nothing, and no-one, can change. And this is the correct, the perfect, Deen, although many remain in ignorance of this." 30:30 Interpretation of Meaning
 

This Muslim perspective is the true perspective, the true way, which reveals, and is a path toward, Jannah (InshaAllah) and all other perspectives, ways, paths, and so on, are kufr - a concealment of, an ignorance of, the fundamental truth of Tawheed, which is the truth about our true Muslim nature, our fitrah: the truth about Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and our relationship to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala, and thus the truth about the very meaning and purpose of our brief mortal lives. Kufr - manifest for example in Tawagheet, in obedience to and submission to and loyalty to other than Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala - conceals this true nature, this truth, and thus takes us away from the path to Jannah. Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala says:

 
"Allah is the Wali of those who believe: from darkness, He leads them into the light, while those do not believe have, as their Wali, their Taghut so that they are led from light into darkness. For them, there is the Fire, where they shall dwell forever." 2: 257 Interpretation of Meaning
 

(2) As a Muslim, I regard my earlier philosophy, which I first called "Folk Culture" and then The Numinous Way, as kufr - a concealment of the reality, the truth, of Tawheed, and thus as a manifestation of Jahiliyyah.

(3) As Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala says:

 
"You who believe, be firm in being fair - as a witness for Allah - even though it is not to your own advantage, nor to the advantage of your kin, and whether the matter concerns the rich, or the poor. For Allah is the best protector (of all). Do not just follow your own desires, for you may deviate, and turn away, and Allah is always knowing of all that you do." 4:135 Interpretation of Meaning
(4) There must also, of course, be a sincere belief, by the individual undertaking Shahadah, in what the words of the Testimony of Faith mean and imply - that Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) is the Messenger and Prophet of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala, and that Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala is the one, and only, God, and a sincere intention to live, as a Muslim, according to the Way which Muhammad (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) revealed, evident as this Way is in the Quran and Sunnah, and thus in Shariah.



 


 
Questions Regarding Martyrdom Operations, Jannah and Jizya
1
Hosted by www.Geocities.ws