Prophetic Integrity An Inspiration

Prophethood has always held a central place in Islamic theological reflection. Prophets are not followed because of coercion or wealth, but because of their balanced teaching, ethical clarity, and the miracles that support their truth. Their leadership inspires. Of all their qualities, moral integrity—ṣidq (truthfulness)—was considered so foundational that classical theologians listed it among the essential beliefs every Muslim must hold about a prophet. This quality was not merely ethical; it was epistemological. The Prophet’s truthfulness is the guarantee of the truth of revelation. As Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī writes:

“If the source of information is corrupt, then what follows is invalid.” (al-Maṭālib al-ʿĀliyah)

Prophetic honesty, then, is not merely a virtue—it is a reflection of the ontological harmony between the Prophet and the Divine Will. His truth mirrors the covenant between him and God. And it was that truth that inspired, and it so clear, that it was logical. Al-Taftāzānī explains in Sharḥ al-ʿAqā’id:

“If it were possible for a prophet to lie, even once, then belief in revelation would collapse — hence ṣidq is rationally and textually obligatory.”

Treaties & Deceit

Muslim political theorists extended this principle—though to a lesser degree—to rulers and heads of state. A leader devoid of truthfulness is epistemically unfit: fundamentally unreliable as a source of knowledge, judgment, or legitimate authority. His mirror becomes blurred, reflecting not strength or courage, but weak faith and a severed connection to divine responsibility. As Imām Abū Manṣūr al-Māturīdī taught, divine obligation (taklīf) assumes that those in power speak truthfully. When a ruler severs the bond between language and reality, he collapses the moral framework that makes obedience meaningful. The Muʿtazilī scholar ʿAbd al-Jabbār similarly argued that obedience to a dishonest leader is tantamount to obedience to falsehood—an ethical contradiction and theological impossibility. Shāh Waliyyullāh al-Dihlawī captures this brilliantly in Ḥujjatullāh al-Bāligha:

“The Prophet’s amānah was not just personal but institutional, and imāms who come after must reflect it in justice, restraint, mercy, and dedication to the sharīʿah.”

Shari’ah & Sidq

This is not merely a theological matter. Classical Islamic law, especially within the Mālikī school, explicitly condemns ghadr (treachery)—even in war, and especially in the context of treaties. Al-Dardīr writes in al-Sharḥ al-Kabīr:

“Treachery is not permitted — even with disbelievers.” — 2/196

And more directly:

“Fulfilling the treaty is obligatory. If the Imām fears treachery from the enemy, he may not break the treaty until he openly nullifies it [on equal terms].” — 2/196

Breaking a treaty under the pretense of diplomacy, using negotiations to buy time for military aggression, or lying to the public while secretly escalating conflict—these are all classified as prohibited treachery in Islamic law. From this perspective, Trump’s conduct is not only a breach of political integrity, but a moral betrayal and legal transgression. In Islam, truth is not optional in leadership. Without it, both revelation and governance lose their claim to legitimacy. Sad, his most passionate supporters claim to do so in name of faith and integrity.

As we move forward in an increasingly unstable world, being known as a nation whose leaders lie will only further erode the trust required to heal a fractured global order. Trumping others is not the way of the Prophets. It is the opposite.

imam Suhaib Webb,

The Qur’an describes people like Cruz:

“يُحَرِّفُونَ الْكَلِمَ عَن مَوَاضِعِهِ”

“They distort the word from its rightful place.” (Qur’an 5:13)

For context: Cruz, when asked about his support for Israel, claimed that the Bible teaches God curses those who curse Israel—implying the modern state. This is a textbook example of the Qur’anic charge: interpretation for material or political gain. The verse he misquoted is Genesis 12:3, which reads in early Jewish translations:

“I will bless those who bless you, and he who curses you, I will curse; and in you shall all the families of the earth be blessed.”

A quick glance at early exegesis of the Bible shows how far Cruz’s distortion goes. Actually—let me take the gloves off. “Distortion” is too soft. What Cruz did, following the lead of other Christian Zionists, was falsification. He lied about God.

As I noted above, early biblical interpreters—Jewish and Christian—rejected Cruz’s reading.

Philo of Alexandria saw Abraham as a symbol of divine wisdom—not nationalism.

Targum Onkelos rendered the verse plainly, without political implications.

Paul said the true heir of Abraham is Christ, and the blessing is faith—not ethnicity (Gal. 3:16).

Church Fathers like Augustine interpreted Genesis 12:3 as a call to righteousness—not foreign policy.

None of them saw this as divine approval for a modern nation-state 2,000 years later.

Genesis 12:3 was a spiritual covenant—twisted today into a political slogan.

The irony? Cruz and Christian Zionists have elevated this fabrication into dogma.

If it were benign, it wouldn’t matter—people can believe what they want.

But today, it is this interpretation that allows them, in the name of faith, to dehumanize Palestinians and casually call for the bombing of Iran.

The issue of whether Muslim women can marry non-Muslim men has been subject to debate in recent times. However, there has been a binding consensus among Islamic scholars since the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) that such marriages are impermissible. This consensus is rooted in the understanding of Islamic law and the principles that govern marital relations. This view is grounded in various Quranic verses and Hadith, such as:

• “Do not marry polytheistic women until they believe” (Quran 2:221).

• “And do not marry the polytheistic men to your women until they believe” (Quran 2:221).

• “Then marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four” (Quran 4:3), which implies that marriage should be within the bounds of faith.

The Role of Scholars and Usul al-Fiqh

To navigate complex issues like marriage and other contemporary challenges, it is crucial to rely on scholars well-versed in Usul al-Fiqh, the principles of Islamic jurisprudence. Usul al-Fiqh involves:

1. Determining What Constitutes Evidence: Not every claim can be supported as valid evidence in Sharia. As Imam Al-Baydawi stated, “Not everything can be an evidence in Sharia.”

2. Proper Utilization of Evidence: Knowing how to apply evidence correctly. “The principle in private parts is prohibition; if both permissibility and prohibition are encountered in a woman, prohibition prevails” (Imam al-Suyuti).

3. Scholarly Qualifications: Ensuring that those who engage in Islamic legal discussions have the necessary academic and practical training. “The conditions of the person who can engage in Islamic law must be met” (Imam Al-Baydawi).

Refuting Modern Arguments for Permissibility

Some modern scholars argue that there is no explicit evidence in the Quran and Sunnah against marriages between Muslim women and non-Muslim men, thereby claiming such marriages are permissible. This argument relies on the principle of Istishab, which presumes continuity unless there is evidence to the contrary. However, this principle is misapplied in this context.

Understanding Istishab and Its Application

Istishab means assuming that a ruling continues to apply unless there is clear evidence to change it. In the context of marriage, the default state is that marital relations are haram without a valid marriage contract (nikah). This principle places the burden of proof on those claiming permissibility. They must provide clear evidence from the Quran and Sunnah to justify their stance.

• Imam al-Shafi’i: “All private parts are prohibited for everyone under all circumstances, except when allowed by marriage or ownership.”

• Principle of Istishab: “Seeking evidence to prove a point without evidence is rejected.”

Legal Foundations in Islamic Marriage

1. Presumption of Prohibition: The foundational state of marital relations is one of prohibition unless there is a valid contract.

• Imam al-Shafi’i: “The foundational relationship between non-marital people is that they are not allowed to have a physical relationship.”

2. Burden of Proof: It is not sufficient to claim permissibility without evidence. The absence of explicit prohibition does not automatically translate to permissibility.

• Imam al-Qarafi al-Maliki: “The foundation of sexual relations, the default of other people’s property, and the default of other people’s wealth is haram unless there is an aqid.”

Conclusion: Adherence to Traditional Scholarship

In conclusion, the long-standing consensus against marriages between Muslim women and non-Muslim men is well-founded in Islamic jurisprudence. Scholars trained in Usul al-Fiqh provide the necessary framework to understand and navigate such issues. Young Muslims are encouraged to invest their time in learning their faith deeply, adhering to traditional scholarship, and understanding the principles that guide Islamic law.

By focusing on these principles and maintaining a strong educational foundation, Muslims can ensure that their practices align with the core teachings of Islam and continue to uphold the integrity of their religious traditions.

Dr. Abdullah Hakim Quick | Official Website of Dr ...

Muslim-American Business women. She has appeared on the Oprah Winfrey show,

Covers and business features of the Chicago Tribune, in the New York Times and

Fitness features in Prevention, Azizah and Experience Life Magazines. Her efforts as

both a health and fitness educator and Muslim businesswoman has afforded her the

opportunity to be invited as a special guest to the White House Iftar Dinner by President

Barack Obama in both 2012 and 2013 with the honor of sitting directly next to the

President.

She received her interdisciplinary Bachelor's Degree in Exercise Science, Public Health

and Psychology from Southern Connecticut State University and throughout her 20-year

career in health and fitness she has received 13 fitness and nutrition certifications, in

addition to being an OASIS In The Overwhelm Master Trainer: A Professionally

Recognized Stress Management Coach Certification and Training Program.

Mubarakah is an international speaker in which she lectures, promotes, and conducts

workshops on health, fitness, business, social media marketing and women in Islam, .

She is a published author, writer, and poet and lives in New Haven CT with her

husband.

The MSA at The John Jay College of Criminal Justice invited me for a series of talks on dawa. Instead of starting with a lecture, they broke up into groups and focused on the following:

1. What kind of dawa would help me reach my potential
2. What are my personal dawa needs
3. What are my environmental dawa needs

Their thoughts are valuable, as I told them, "gold" for anyone working with college students and engaged in religious education and ministry.

I left with a lot to think about, and I appreciated their sharing. If you like the work I do, please support me by signing up for my online institute, SWISS at suhaibwebb.com

How can we understand Allah's love and what are its signs?

In this episode, I share parts of his speech.

Why are efforts to wrestle our faith until it submits its voice to the notions of the left or the right a failure to uphold the balance and truth of prophethood,; and why are unchecked identity politics a threat to our unity as a community as well as the country when they are not nuanced and cleansed with the language and foundations of Faith and our scholarly heritage? That and more.

رَبَّنَا أَخْرِجْنَا مِنْ هَذِهِ الْقَرْيَةِ الظَّالِمِ أَهْلُهَا وَاجْعَل لَنَا مِنْ لَدُنْكَ وَلِيًّا وَاجْعَل لَنَا مِنْ لَدُنْكَ نَصِيرًا (75) }
عَطْفٌ عَلَى اسْمِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ، أَيْ وَفِي سَبِيلِ الْمُسْتَضْعَفِينَ، فَإِنَّ خَلَاصَ الْمُسْتَضْعَفِينَ مِنْ سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ.
(وَلِيًّا) أَيْ مَنْ يَسْتَنْقِذُنَا (وَاجْعَلْ لَنا مِنْ لَدُنْكَ نَصِيراً) أَيْ ينصرنا عليهم

وَاجِبٌ عَلَى النَّاسِ أَنْ يَفْدُوا الْأُسَارَى بِجَمِيعِ أَمْوَالِهِمْ

While the harm injustice and oppression cause is apparent to most people, where they differ is the degree win which they oppose it. Consider the pagan Qur’eish: consistently rocked by large numbers of claimants to power, and those claimants continued jockeying for authority, they were left with no central authority to settle their disputes. As a response, they allied (حلف الفضول) in the home of ‘Abdullah bin Jad’an to collectively repel injustice and intervene to protect the oppressed. The Prophet (sa) witnessed that alliance as a young man. After he became a prophet and settled in Medina, he said,
لَقَدْ حَضَرْتُ فِي دَارِ ابْنِ جُدْعَانَ حِلْفًا لَوْ دُعِيتُ إِلَيْهِ الْآنَ لَأَجَبْتُ
“I witnessed in the home of ‘Abdullah bin Jad’an alliance. If I were called to join something similar to in Islam, I would accept.”
Ibn al-Athir mentions that they named it the alliance of virtues, honoring an ancient association of the same name, which took place at a time when the Meccans stood united for justice and the defense of the marginalized. Imam Fayruzabadi wrote that they gave it that name because each of its participants swore that they would not allow another person to use his status (fall) to oppress another person.
Once Islam arrived, it made opposition to oppression as one of its aims. The Prophet (sa) further emphasized that when he said, “Fear committing oppression because oppression will bring oppression In the Hereafter.” The ancient Arabs used to say, “Help you, brother, if he is oppressed.” The Prophet (sa) added, “Help you, brother, if he is oppressed or an oppressor.” He (sa) was asked, “We can help an oppressed person, but how do we help an oppressor?” The Prophet (sa) clarified that saying, “Stop him from his oppression, even if you have to take him by his hand. That is how you help him.”

The early Caliphs of Islam would confront oppression and injustice head-on. However, during the reign of the first four Caliphs injustice was handled largely by reminding people of their responsibility to God. But, as the Muslim empire grew, the number of Muslims swelled, and life became more complicated. Thus, during the reign of Abd al-Malik bin Marwan, he chose a day to listen to the concerns of the oppressed. If their concerns were problematic or required a judgment, he sent them to al-Qadi Abu Idris al-Awaydai.

During the reign of ‘Umar bin ‘Abd al-Aziz after Sulayman bin ‘Abd al-Malik was buried, Caliph ‘Umar sat and had a caller inform the people that anyone mistreated by Sulayman should make their claim. By the time he was done, everything acquired by Sulayman and his family (The Umayyads) unjustly was returned. Such that a friend said to ‘Umar bin ‘Abd al-Aziz, “Do you not fear the wrath of those you’ve punished?” He responded, “Each day that I fear their wrath instead of the wrath of the Hereafter,

Then the Abbasi Caliph came to power, and it continued that tradition with al-Mahdi, then al-Hadi, then Rashid, the al-Mamun until the reign of al-Muhtadi in the year two hundred and fifty-five after the Migration of the Prophet (sa). It did not stop them, but because of volume, the state delegated the responsibility to judges who appointed case workers who could look into the claims each day. Eventually, these cases were taken to the high court where they were settled.
أن الأمير نوح بن (أسد) أحد الولاة على ما وراء النهر ،لما فرض الخراج على أهل سمرقند ،بعث بريدا اليهم بذلك ، فأحضر أمير سمرقند الأئمة والمشايخ وأعيان البلد وقرأ عليهم الكتاب ،فقال الفقيه أبو منصور الماتريدي: قد أديت رسالة الأمير فاردد إليه الجواب وقل له: زدنا ظلما حتى نزيد في دعاء الليل ،ثم تفرقوا،
فلم تذهب إلا أيام حتى وجدوه قتيلا ، وفي بطنه زجَّ رمح مكتوب عليه :
بغى وللبفي سهــــامٌ تنتـــــظر......أتته من أيدي المنـايا والقــدَرَ
سهام أيدي القانتات في السحر......يرمين عن قوس لها الليل وتَرَ

There are numerous examples of leaders who opposed injustice in Islamic history. I would like to mention one noteworthy example here. Once a man came to the court of al-Mansur ibn abi ‘Amir, claiming that one of al-Mansur’s servants had wronged him. He expressed that he had the man subpoenaed by the court, but he refused to come. Al-Mansur turned to his servant, ordering him to go and stand with the man making the claims. There, in front of al-Mansur, the case was heard. After it was over, the Caliph ordered the servant taken away to “The person in charged of the oppressed,” sentenced and removed from his post. That was in Spain, al-Andalus. What is remarkable is that there was a person, “In charge of the affairs of the oppressed.”
During the Caliphate of ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Nasir, the Caliph was looking to purchase some property. He approached al-Qadi Mundhir bin Sa’id al-Buluti, offering to purchase an orphanage attached to al-Buluti’s home. The Qadi noted that the house was in excellent condition and that the Orphans were financially well off (Implying that the price would not be low): “If you offer them a price that will make them happy, I will command the person in charge of their trust to sell it to you.” The Caliph balked, refusing to offer even fair price. Al-Buluti, fearing that the Caliph would try to usurp the property, had it demolished, selling what was left over for an excellent amount: enough to suffice the orphans. When the Caliph inquired why, al-Buluti read the verse,
“Regarding the boat, it belonged to a group of poor sailors, so I decided to damage it because there was a king chasing them who had taken previous boats for plunder.” Qur’an 18-79
Sheikh Hamuda al-Rikli was a scholar from Tunis. During hit time, the government of Tunis was kind to scholars, keeping them close to power, showing them with patronage and doing what every it could to keep them happy. One night, he was sitting the president of Tunis who said, “The kings before us killed scholars, but we honor them and bring them close to power.” Sheikh Hamuda responded, “This reality is clear: The kings of old committed atrocities, the scholars repudiated them, so they killed those scholars. We are quiet because of your patronage so why would you kill us?” The leader became upset, returned to his quarters and ordered all the scholars to return to their homes to save Sheikh Hamuda. As they left, they were certain that Sheikh Hamuda would be punished. After a little while, the leader came out, thanked the sheik for his honesty and gifted him a private car.
Abu Bakr TarTusha advised the leader of the Andalusian army, “Fix the barrier by helping the oppressed.” And Salim bin “Abdullah sent a letter to ‘Umar bin ‘Abd al-Aziz saying, “If you can, come off the last day without any oppressed person making a claim against you.”

فُسْطَاطُ الْمُسْلِمِينَ يَوْمَ الْمَلْحَمَةِ الْغُوطَةُ، إِلَى جَانِبِ مَدِينَةٍ يُقَالُ لَهَا: دِمَشْقُ
There are four narrations of this hadith

1. Abu Darda – it is not strong because between the companion who narrated is not mentioned. There is a connected narration of it, but it is weak because of a weak narrator, Ibn Abi Maryam
2. The Hadith of Muadh – It has narrators well known for lying, and some of them were even considered abandoned.
3. The hadith of Abu Huraira – It is extremely weak for some reason
4. There is some confusion about this narration, some claiming it is sahih. However, this is a mistake in combining two narrations, one narrative that does not state anything about Ghuta is sahih, while the other narration that does, as noted above is weak.

An extension of an authentic hadith is the opinions of the companions on issues that are related to the unseen. This includes the companion’s explanations and thoughts on issues where personal opinion is impossible. Meaning, their opinion rested on revelation. Ibn Hajar wrote,
والحق أن ضابط ما يفسره الصحابي إن كان مما لا مجال للاجتهاد فيه, فحكمه الرفع وإلا فلا، كالإخبار عن الأمور الماضية من بدء الخلق وقصص الأنبياء, وعن الأمور الآتية كالملاحم والفتن والبعث وصفة الجنة والنار, والإخبار عن عمل يحصل به ثواب مخصوص أو عقاب مخصوص، فهذه الأشياء لا مجال للاجتهاد فيها فيحكم لها بالرفع
“The correct principle in this regard is that explanation of the companions, specifically regarding issues where personal opinion is impossible ….such as events from the past, like the beginning of creation, stories of previous prophets, prophecy related to fitna, resurrection, the description of paradise and hell, and actions that bring about specific rewards or punishments. Those type of things to not permit opinions, so they are considered something taught to them by the Prophets (sa).”
If a Hadith is acceptable, then it must be interpreted correctly, not in a sloppy way or in a way that makes its application impossible.
The First Principle
أن الأصل في تنزيل أحاديث الفتن على الأزمان والأشخاص الرد
“Its is not allowed to apply prophetic hadith about the end of times to specific times, places and people.”
That does not mean we reject the application of those hadith, nor should we be taxed in their application. What it means is that their application is guided by the scholars. During the Prophet’s time, there were a group of companions who thought it was a man named Ibn al-Sayyad, some even swearing so. During the time of Hajjaj, Asma said,
حَدَّثَنَا أَنَّ فِى ثَقِيفٍ كَذَّابًا وَمُبِيرًا, فَأَمَّا الْكَذَّابُ فَرَأَيْنَاهُ وَأَمَّا الْمُبِيرُ فَلاَ إِخَالُكَ إِلاَّ إِيَّاهُ أَمَا إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ
“The Prophet (sa) told us that from the tribe of Thaqif there would appear a liar and a ruined person. We have seen the liar. As for the ruined person, you are in no confusion regarding him.”
Imam al-Nawwawi noted that scholars agree the liar was al-Mukhtar al-Thaqafi, who claimed Gabriel came to him, while the ruined person was al-Hajjaj bin Yusuf for obvious reasons.
A recent example is scholars interpreting the hadith,
وَيَتَقَارَبَ الزَّمَانُ
“From the signs of the hour, time will move quickly.”
The Second Principle
الأصل حمل النصِّ على ظاهره
“The literal meaning of a text is the default of interpretation, while the figurative meaning is an exception.”
Perhaps the greatest misapplication of this is the hadith, “The hour will not start until the sun rises from the West.” Scholars, old and new agree that this is a literal hadith. Recently, however, some people have claimed it is converted from the West. Another example was that the Dajjal was laptop computers. Both interpretations run contrary to the scholarly consensus, and even if someone tried to apply the principle of an explicit or implicit meaning, have no support.

The Third Principle
أن يكون التنزيل بعيداً عن التكلُّف
“The interpretation is not overly complicated or burdensome.”
Meaning: it is not a stretch or places an unreasonable burden on people to understand. See the example above. There are some principles related to religious responsibilities: They are not beyond people’s scope, they are not overly difficult to understand, and they don’t cause harm.

The Fourth Principle
التحقق من طبيعة الواقعة واستكمالها للأوصاف الواردة في النصّ
“Verifying that a situation, time place or person completely agrees with they text.”
There are three conditions for a text related to the end of times:

1. the text
2. the situation
3. the action that should take place during that period.
   For texts related to the end of time to be matched with a given period or person, all three must align completely. That implies that first, there must be a match tatabuq, and second, a person cannot be ignorant of the optics – jahil.
   فإذا لم يكن هناك تطابق بين الواقع الحاصل وبين جميع أوصاف النصّ لم يصح التنزيل حينئذٍ, فلا يصح جهل شيء من أجزاء الواقع
   “If there is no corroboration between the time and the text in regards to every description in the text, then it is not allowed to apply it to that situation, nor is it allowed to be ignorant of the situation.”
   An example of this is the sloppy application of the dajjal and the sun rising from the west, and is often applied to the coming of Imam Mehdi.
   Is there an example of its application?
   لَا تَقُومُ السَّاعَةُ حَتَّى يُقَاتِلَ الْمُسْلِمُونَ التُّرْكَ قَوْمًا كَأَنَّ وُجُوهَهُمْ الْمَجَانُّ الْمُطْرَقَةُ، يَلْبَسُونَ الشَّعْرَ، وَيَمْشُونَ فِي الشَّعْر
   “The Last Hour would not come until the Muslims fight with the Turks-a people whose faces would be like hammered shields wearing clothes of hair and walking (with shoes) of hair.”
   Imam al-Nawwawi wrote,
   وهذه كلها معجزات لرسول الله فقد وجِدَ قتال هؤلاء الترك بجميع صفاتهم التي ذكرها..... فوجدوا بهذه الصفات كلها في زماننا
   “All of those (narrations about this) are miracles of the Prophet (sa). The fighting with the Turks has occurred, and they had every description the Prophet (sa) mentioned….thus we find every one of those descriptions of them applicable and present.”
   Another recent example, “Tall buildings.”
   The Fifth Principle ومراجعة أهل
   العلم
   Extenuating this is a wonderful narration from Hafs ibn Ghayyath. He noticed that people were stating that the Mehid had come so he asked Sufyan al-Thawri (ra) who responded,
   يا أبا عَبْد الله إن الناس قد أكثروا في المهدي فما تقول فيه؟ قال: إن مرَّ على بابك فلا تكن منه في شيء حتى يجتمع الناس عليه
   Signs of Sloppiness
4. Misplacing the order of something.
5. Not collecting all the relevant hadith about a subject
   The Sixth Principle
   لا تعجل الأشراط لتسرع ما بعدها
   It is not allowed to try and rush the a sign of the Hereafter, hoping for another one that comes after it.”

SwissCast #2 al-Ghazzali on Being Woke
قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَعِظُكُمْ بِوَاحِدَةٍ أَنْ تَقُومُوا لِلَّهِ مَثْنَى وَفُرَادَى ثُمَّ تَتَفَكَّرُوا مَا بِصَاحِبِكُمْ مِنْ جِنَّةٍ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا نَذِيرٌ لَكُمْ بَيْنَ يَدَيْ عَذَابٍ شَدِيدٍ
“Say, I’m only here to awaken you: to arise for Allah two or one of you.” Qur’an 34:46

Sh. Al-Harari
الْيَقَظَة من سنة الْغَفْلَة والنهوض من ورطة الفترة
“Woke from negligence and falling into destructive weakness.”

Being Woke is the First Station of Worship

فَأَوَّلُ مَنَازِلِ الْعُبُودِيَّةِ الْيَقَظَةُ وَهِيَ انْزِعَاجُ الْقَلْبِ لِرَوْعَةِ الِانْتِبَاهِ مِنْ رَقْدَةِ الْغَافِلِينَ، وَلِلَّهِ مَا أَنْفَعَ هَذِهِ الرَّوْعَةَ، وَمَا أَعْظَمَ قَدْرَهَا وَخَطَرَهَا، وَمَا أَشَدَّ إِعَانَتَهَا عَلَى السُّلُوكِ! فَمَنْ أَحَسَّ بِهَا فَقَدْ أَحَسَّ وَاللَّهِ بِالْفَلَاحِ
“The first stop on the path of “You alone we worship” is woke. Woke is a disturbance of the heart that compels it to guard falling into a permanent slumber of negligence. By Allah, it is the most beneficial state, the greatest and most honorable. Nothing helps a person with the same strength on the path (like it), and whoever experiences it, experiences true success.

قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَعِظُكُمْ بِوَاحِدَةٍ أَنْ تَقُومُوا لِلَّهِ مَثْنَى وَفُرَادَى ثُمَّ تَتَفَكَّرُوا مَا بِصَاحِبِكُمْ مِنْ جِنَّةٍ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا نَذِيرٌ لَكُمْ بَيْنَ يَدَيْ عَذَابٍ شَدِيدٍ
“Say, I’m only here to awaken you: to arise for Allah two or one of you.” Qur’an 34:46

إِشَارَةٌ إِلَى جَمِيعِ الْأَحْوَالِ فَإِنَّ الْإِنْسَانَ إِمَّا أَنْ يَكُونَ مَعَ غَيْرِهِ أَوْ يَكُونَ وَحْدَهُ، فَإِذَا كَانَ مَعَ غَيْرِهِ دَخَلَ فِي قَوْلِهِ: مَثْنى وَإِذَا كَانَ وَحْدَهُ دَخَلَ فِي قَوْلِهِ: فُرادى فَكَأَنَّهُ يَقُولُ تَقُومُوا لِلَّهِ مُجْتَمِعِينَ وَمُنْفَرِدِينَ
“Alludes to all situations because either you are with others, or you are alone. If you are with others, then “by twos” applies to you, and if you are alone, “alone” applies. Thus, it is as though God is saying, Awaken together or alone.”

وكلام العشاق في حال السكر يُطوَى ولا يحكى. فلما خف عنهم سكرهم وردوا إلى سلطان العقل الذى هو ميزان الله في أرضه
“The words of those overcome by love while intoxicated should not be shared. When the sober up, the sovereignty of their reason will return, and reason (coupled with a proper understanding of faith) is God’s scale on earth.” Mishkat al-Anwar pg. 57

The Path to Sobriety

1. Miracles
2. Experiences

Type of Intoxication

1. With Faith
2. With the self
3. With Society

Components of Being Woke

1. Noting blessings - لحظ النعمة
2. Being aware of evil and sins - مطالعة الْجِنَايَة
3. Seizing the hour - الانتباه لمعْرِفَة الزِّيَادَة وَالنُّقْصَان فِي الْأَيَّام