Following on from the Lausanne Treaty of 1923, when the Ottomans were defeated in World War One, much was said regarding the collapse of the caliphate, by Muslims as well as non-Muslims. And bearing great relevance to the topic of the caliphate, the Prophet (ﷺ) is reported to have said,
“The knots of Islam will be undone one by one. Each time a knot is undone, the next one will be grasped. The first to be undone will be the ruling, and the last will be the prayer.” [1]
99 years has elapsed
Today marks 99 years since the destruction of the Ottoman Caliphate, heralding arguably the darkest chapter in Islamic history after the death of Rasūl Allah (ﷺ).
The Ummah continues to suffer from the after-effects of this calamitous event, precisely because the Muslims currently have no collective collective moral strength, which is embodied in the form of an inclusive Islamic polity.
The Middle East and North Africa were subsequently carved up between Britain and France, as Mark Sykes and Francois Georges Picot planned the future of the former Ottoman territories with a pen and ruler.
What followed since was an uninterrupted chain of secular dictatorships and petrol-rich sheikhdoms. Many of these regimes came to power via military coups, dressed up as pseudo-liberators, whilst the Gulf monarchies unashamedly enjoyed the fruits of their forefathers’ betrayal during WWI.
Concept of caliphate is constantly maligned
The history lesson aside, the concept of the caliphate, and the general Muslim populace’s desire for it, continues to be maligned by academics, journalists, Western policy makers and governments.
Secular liberals and modernists, both Muslim and non-Muslim, from across the political spectrum, appear to have adopted an attitude that a caliphate is simply incompatible with the modern world, rendering it barbaric and despotic.
The irony is that they all seem to conveniently forget that for over a thousand years, Islamic civilisation under successive caliphates, from the Umayyids to the Ottomans, led humanity in science, philosophy, arts, and technology.
Furthermore, agenda-driven critics and muscular ideologues also overlook that not only did every caliphate have the trappings of a modern state, but they were the beacon and example of modernity for their relevant period in history.
Again, I cannot do justice in explaining Islam’s contribution to the world as we know it today, when libraries are filled with books and historical testimonies of non-Muslims who substantiate this undeniable fact.
However, it must be stated from the onset that the caliphate is not regarded as a utopian state, conceptually or in practice. This was never the case when Prophet Muḥammad (ﷺ) ruled over Madīna, or when the Khulafāh Rāshidūn (Rightly Guided Caliphs) expanded the caliphate, or those that came after.
In fact, when the caliphate entered hereditary rule and kingship, there were cases of internal corruption, theological deviation, and infighting. Rather, this polity is what followed the end of prophethood, and the practical manifestation of Allah’s (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) divine law on Earth.
This is evident in the following ḥadīth of Rasūl Allah (ﷺ):
“The prophets used to manage the political affairs of Banī Isrāīl. Whenever a prophet died, another prophet succeeded him, but there will be no prophets after me; instead there will be caliphs, and they will number many.”
The Companions asked,
“What, then, do you order us?”
He (ﷺ) said,
“Fulfil allegiance to them, one after the other. Give them their dues. Verily, Allah will ask them about what He entrusted them with.” [2]
The virtues and societal conditions sought from the caliphate, deduced from the classical scholars after scrutinising the Sharīʿah, is to establish social justice, to protect the honour and property of its citizens, and the preservation of the Islamic way of life.
Now, this may be a sour grape for the intolerant ‘tolerants’ who stubbornly comprehend the Islamic system through the lenses of a secular paradigm, assuming that liberal democracy is the default benchmark against which every governing system should be compared. But there is also a political context to this ideological objection of the caliphate, and that is the conflation of Europe’s systematic separation of the ‘Church and state’.
This period of secularisation, which is symbolised in the era known as the ‘Enlightenment’, has never occurred in the Muslim world during the existence of a caliphate, nor would it be befitting.
Those that attempt to conflate Islam and western Christianity under the arbitrary term of “religion” invariably superimpose the pre-reformation Christian historical baggage onto Islam. The fact of the matter is that Islamic history is not plagued with the same repressive church-like institutions that stifled human advancement, and the classical Islamic governance already secured the rights that the Enlightenment sought to secure, and more.
The notion of a caliph as an employee that represents and is accountable to the people, and Islamic history, shows a level of accountability that we still have not yet seen in Western politics. Despite this, there were attempts during the 19th century to minimise the legislative powers of the caliph, and to modernise certain aspects of the declining Ottoman Caliphate, to make it more ‘palatable’ with its thriving European contemporaries; but the idea of a systematic separation of “religion and state” was unthinkable.
Additionally, Islam’s world-view that was represented by the caliphate had always clashed with other empires it encountered; from the Persians, Byzantines, Mongols, Crusaders, right up to the imperial powers of Europe.
Hence, after the destruction of the caliphate on 3rd March 1924, Christian Europe had successfully eradicated the only superpower that it had been in a constant state of conflict with for nearly a millennium. Of course, Europe had suffered centuries of bloody internal wars, but the fight against the ‘Mohammedans’ was a unique one, due to the cultural and religious dissimilarity.
Soviet downfall, 9/11, Arab Spring, and ISIS
After the downfall of the Soviet Union in 1989, Francis Fukuyama had arrogantly stated that humanity had reached the “end of history” – implying that liberal democracy was the only natural form of government to have survived the testing waves of global change. [3]
Fukuyama was clearly naive in his assessment of the world, because he assumed that in the absence of the caliphate, the Islamic mind would also be non-existent – he was grossly mistaken.
The 9/11 attacks, and the subsequent US-led ‘War on Terror’ that followed is a testimony to this. After the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, and the rise of armed groups in Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan, it became unavoidably clear that the desire for the return of the caliphate was very much existent.
The Arab Spring, or what remains of it, is another example of the Islamic sentiment of the general Muslim masses in wanting Islam to play a greater role in society. Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, and more evidently in Syria, are prime examples of this. The revolutions that spread like wildfire in 2011 initially began as a grassroots movement, in order to attain self-determination in a region, which had been ruled by Western-backed dictators for decades.
Unfortunately, with the interference of Western powers and their regional proxies, the sincere efforts of those who lost their lives during the uprisings, had been sidelined and forgotten by political opportunists in the search for power. Naturally, cosmetic changes were made to the ‘new’ post-Arab Spring countries, but in nearly every case, the oppressive regimes and state apparatus remained.
The emergence of the group known as ISIS, which claimed to have restored the caliphate on 29 June 2014, was a dream come true for the West. The former chief of the British Armed forces, Sir General Richard Dannatt, justified the occupation of Afghanistan, and Britain’s involvement in the War on Terror, by stating that it was to prevent:
“…the historic Islamic caliphate, running through south Asia, the Middle East, North Africa and up through south and south-east Europe.” [4]
Lo and behold, the West had at last found its medieval caliphate in the form of ISIS, which in reality was a doctor’s sick note to continue its destructive foreign policy in the Middle East. The criminality of ISIS has been used as a stick by Western politicians to beat the Muslims with, and a tool to demonise the noble concept of the caliphate. The media continues to refer to ISIS as an “Islamic State”, knowing that the majority of Muslims, including like-minded groups who share the same goal, have unequivocally rejected their claim to the so-called caliphate.
Don’t be afraid to champion the concept
The abhorrent actions of ISIS cannot be used to pressure Muslims into rejecting the concept of the caliphate for two very simple reasons.
Firstly, there is a unanimous consensus amongst classical and contemporary scholars within Sunni Islam, that the caliphate is the ideal form of governance for Muslims, and to work for its re-establishment is an obligation. However, Muslims will inevitably differ in the methodology of how the caliphate should be restored, due to theological and political differences, but the scriptural evidences and scholarly works emphasising its importance are too overpowering.
Secondly, the fact that Rasūl Allah’s (ﷺ) burial was delayed until a caliph was appointed could not have been a more significant indication of how serious the Companions (raḍiy Allāhu ʿanhu) took the matter of the caliphate.
“The aforementioned reasons, coupled with the dire situation the Muslim world is currently in, as a result of seeking liberation by adopting failed secular ideologies, the only real option remaining for the Ummah is to return to a system which, for all its previous mistakes, protected Islam and safeguarded its citizens from harm.“
Those who are adamant that the caliphate is incompatible with the modern world, and to anticipate its return is a romanticised idea, need to appreciate from an Islamic perspective, that the Prophet Muḥammad (ﷺ) has prophesised its permanent return [5], and Allah (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) has promised the Muslims authority on Earth. [6]
Also read
Also watch
Source: Islam21c
Notes
[1] Musnad Aḥmed, 31
[2] Saḥīḥ Muslim
[3] https://ps321.community.uaf.edu/files/2012/10/Fukuyama-End-of-history-article.pdf
[4] http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/dec/20/faces-2009-richard-dannatt-tory
[5] Musnad Aḥmed, 273
[6] al-Qur’ān | 24:55
Note to readers: this article was originally published in 2015, and subsequently revised in 2019, 2021, and 2023.
40 Comments
Aslm Dilly,
Your article is unfortunately replete with the same romanticism and dare I say ‘revisionism’, with which certain ‘others’ pepper the Islamic concept of Al Khilafah.
3 issues come to mind:
– Why did the Khilafah (‘Abbasiyoon) ignore the plight of the Muslims in Al Andalus, culminating with the extinction of Muslim rule in Iberia in 1492?
Was there a political and vindicative motive, due to the ‘Ummayyad origins of the ‘renegade dynasty’ in Al Andalus?
– In 1501, another Sunni people were subjugated, culminating with their almost complete annihilation; the Ahl us Sunnah in Iran.
– By the beginning of the 16th century and for the next c. 330 years, which corresponded to the closing stages of the ‘Abbasiyoon and during the ‘Uthmaniyya period, c. 20 million African slaves, with well over half being Sunni Muslims, were kidnapped and transported as slaves, predominately to the ‘World’.
The 3 events I have highlighted above, occurred within c. 20 years of one another. Didn’t the Khilafah have a responsibility to these Muslims?
Fundamentally, Al Khilafah is an Islamic principle based upon sound and irrefutable Islamic evidences. It must be understood in this manner, as we Muslims understand other ‘Afrad’, that is it forms part of our belief as Muslims. Unfortunately, as has and is the case, ‘Al Khilafah is more often then not, presented as a utopian fantasy world, a heaven on earth!
Amongst the ‘glaring’ traits of the Sufi ‘Uthmaniyya ‘Khilafah’ were the abolishing of the the ‘Dhimmi’ laws in 1856, as well as punishment for homosexuality in 1858! All this and more, took place during the ‘Tanzimat Reforms’ during the early to mid 19th century.
Doesn’t a certain cult, in a crescendo of rhetoric, always state that ‘1 kufr law invalidates the state?
Here I must add that I feel like a boxer going into a ring with my hands tied behind my back, when discussing this subject, especially in the contemporary era.
Rather than presenting a ‘Cinderella’ version of the Khilafah, i.e. from the time of Sayyidna’ Abu Bakr RA to that of Abdul Majid II in Istanbul, the Muslim world was one and united, blah, blah, blah…then the clock struck 12 on the 3rd of March 1924 and the Ummah was divided!
We as Muslim are obliged to establish Allah SWT’s deen on this dunya as act of worship. Any benefits thereafter are bonus, not a right!
*New world.
Does anyone feel that people who talk positively about Khilafah, adding the “Im not saying the Caliphate was a utopian state” is a bit like a Muslim having to add “I strongly condemn terrorism” to everything they say?
The blueprint of the modern Middle East was etched out of an artificial geo-political design. It was shaped to be inorganic to the region for perpetual destabilization. The problem is that we confront a great deal of ignorance when left to the discovery of how developments happened over a due course of history. Nations consisting of distinct ethnicities mutually competing for self-determination are disinterested in artificial trusts of unity that ultimately work for their disadvantage. The plight of the Kurds and Assyrian Christians are fitting examples due to their inability to achieve equal inclusion in states based on the centrality of one prevailing ethnicity. Arab nationalism was inspired by British and French statesmen, Sykes-Picot specifically, as a direct application of divide and conquer.
What if the Arabs knew their national identities were drawn up by outsiders that had nothing but their exploitation at heart? The truth is a weighty proposition because it describes a world of neglected proportions. In an age defined by information, we no longer have the luxury of blissful ignorance. Curiosities can be channeled through the internet in ways where we can achieve an individually inspired fact finding mission; yet, can we accept the truth for what it is without denying or forsaking its un-deniability? The concept of the nation-state system leads to war which is a component of destabilization. Unitary systems based on the centralization of power through the localization of authority is an alternative.
The basis of the Khilafah is just that, but is derived from a different tradition where there never was a conflict between religion and science as is the ongoing case with the Judeo-Christian world. Unions of peoples and nations are based on ideas, shared principles, and a common heritage; thus, why is it so unfathomable to revisit the foundations of the Khilafah?
My Allah restore our beloved Khalifah State Ameen. WAA iSLAMAAH!
This article is excellent indeed,very nicely broughtin, reading this will make us to the machinations of western and European machinations in bringing down caliphates.But we muslims are pessimistic about the hadith of our prophet pbuh ,at the end inspite of the best efforts of the forces of the past and present continiously trying to destroy islam and muslims,we have full faith in our prophets prophesy even for last day of the existence of this planet earth a full fledged CALIPHATE WILL BE ESTABILISHED.INSHA ALLAH.
Those who are adamant that the Caliphate is incompatible with the modern world, and to anticipate its return is a romanticised idea, need to appreciate from an Islamic perspective, that the Prophet Muḥammad (sall Allāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam) has prophesised its permanent return,and Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) has promised the Muslims authority on Earth.
This is something there is no doubt in.
There is a great deal of doubt about it. Nonmuslims, to begin with, don’t believe a word of those claims.
The Hell Fire shall have its fill…
…another thing many people are sceptical about.
There is still time. Islam in its essence is easy to follow and simple.
Surah HUD AL Quran.
“And wait, indeed, we are waiting.And to Allah belong the unseen [aspects] of the heavens and the earth and to Him will be returned the matter, all of it, so worship Him and rely upon Him. And your Lord is not unaware of that which you do.”
Verse 122/3
Jzk brother for your comment.
‘Anticipate, indeed we are anticipating too. And to Allah belong the unseen [aspects] of the heavens and the earth and to Him will be returned the matter, all of it, so worship Him and rely upon Him. And your Lord is not unaware of that which you do.’ Quran(122:3)
In regards tto the ” Christian baggage”? What utter nonsense, Islam suffered the same problems as Sufis and other Islamic clergy began to renounce scientific discovery lest it undermine their religion. Al- Ghazaali and his friends killed scientific advancement in Muslm nations. The same thing happens with the Catholic Church. Thing is the West had reformation and enlightenment while Muslim countries are still retarded and backwards
Lol says Troll. Really, your having a laugh man. Are you serious!!¡!!!
Those who are adamant that the Caliphate is incompatible with the modern world, and to anticipate its return is a romanticised idea, need to appreciate from an Islamic perspective, that the Prophet Muḥammad (sall Allāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam) has prophesised its permanent return,and Allāh (subḥānahu wa taʿālā) has promised the Muslims authority on Earth.
Promises, promises…
Little known facts about the caliphate mentioned within this article:
-throughout history there was hardly a time when the caliphate was United. In fact there were many caliphs at the same time. This fact is rarely mentioned.
– 100 years b4 the end of the ottoman caliphate islamic dress code was banned!
– the caliphate was destroyed after it decided to back Germany during ww1
– many caliphs were drunkards
– Hussain Allah be pleased with him was martyred under the guise of the ruling caliphate
– the last caliphate which the article eulogises was run by predominantly hanafi sufis – they would be labelled as mubtadis by the majority who actively push for its return.
100%.
in 1924 was abolished pharody of chaliphate
Dear Shiite (pretending to be AhlusSunnah),
We know you’re not from al-Muslimoon, you’ve always been part of the problem (5th column) pretending to be Muslims. Salahudeen RA taught us best to rid the Riddah from within us before expanding upon obligations.
Please go locate your fathers, oh product of Mutah.
Thank-you and have a miserable life Murtad.
Excellent article.
[Those that attempt and conflate Islām and western Christianity under the arbitrary term “religion” invariably superimpose the pre-reformation Christian historical baggage onto Islām. The fact of the matter is that Islamic history is not plagued with the same repressive church-like institutions that stifled human advancement, and the classical Islamic governance already secured the rights that the Enlightenment sought to secure, and more.]
Islamic religion already buries its own grave in the desert where it came from. Enough of oppression and injustice done in its name – it’s the worst thing to commit grave sins and say it’s in God’s name.
Salam. Ibn Taymiyah was imprisoned for ten years and died in prison for defying the governing caliph of the time and insisting that the caliphate is not a military institution and not even a political construct, but rather is the consensus of the wise persons and scholars on the meaning of justice in an umma that consists of many autonomous communities. Wa Allahu ‘alam. Fi aman Allah.
Jazakallah khair very nice article..thanks fr sharing…Allah bless whole Ummah wd peace n prosperity & protect us frm hypocrites & enemies of Islam & their nefarious designs…Ya Allah rahem
I read this article but before we talk anything else we hv to corected ourself
“We must put an end to anything which brings about any Islamic unity between the sons of the Muslims. The situation now is that Turkey is dead and will never rise again, because we have destroyed its moral strength, the Caliphate and Islām.”[1]
[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/history/past-foreign-secretaries/george-curzon
Asalaamu Alaikum. You quoted the above with the reference shown, the reference given does not have the quote anywhere on the page which I find disappointing. I’m pretty interested to know the source of this quote as I have searched it before and it appears to be fake.
Mr. Hussein does say Curzon “allegedly” said this.
As he is also alleged to have said it in the House of Commons- where, as a peer, he could not speak- it looks even more like something someone thinks he should have said but didn’t.
Do you honestly believe you need a reference for what is apparent as evidence in history as a fact?
Do you need to see the knife when the murderer stands with his hands bathed in blood and rejoicing over the body of the dead Ummah?
Wake up and smell your coffee before someone sells you land in the Bermuda Triangle.
It was narrated by Ahmed in his Musnad, from Al-Nu’man b. Bashir, who said:
“We were sitting in the mosque of the Messenger of Allah (saw), and Bashir was a man who did not speak much, so Abu Tha’labah Al-Khashnee came and said: ‘Oh, Bashir bin Sa’ad, have you memorized the words of the Messenger of Allah (saw) regarding the rulers?’ Huthayfah replied, ‘I have memorized his words’. So Abu Tha’labah sat down and Huthayfah said, ‘The Messenger of Allah (saw) said ‘Prophet-hood will be amongst you as long as Allah wishes, then He will lift it up when He wishes to lift it up. Then there will be a Khilafah on the way of the Prophet, and it will be as long as Allah wishes it to be, then Allah will lift it up when He wishes to lift it up. Then there will be an inheritance rule, and it will last as long as Allah wishes it to, then Allah will lift it up if when He wishes to lift it up. Then there will be a coercive rule and it will last as long as Allah wishes it to be, then Allah will lift it up when He wishes to lift it up. Then there will be a Khilafah on the way of Prophet-hood.’ Then he was silent.”
[Ahmed]
1- The authenticity becomes somehow questionable when an extra person is added to the narration. (The translator)
Words are different and the meaning is whatever the translated decided to write.
2- the word khilafah is left untranslated on purpose, other types of ruling systems are. Gives the impression that the hadeeth is a ‘khilafah’ hadeeth. Whereas if we translate the word khilafah, which can be translated easily, the hadeeth becomes a prophecy about the different ways that muslims will take leading succession one after the other.
3- also to put it simply, the hadeeth in arabic never uses the word khilafah as a defined word or proper name. The hadeeth -translation- doesn’t say ‘THE’ khilafah. . . It merely says ‘a’ khilafah. Any good arabic speaker will understand it as ‘a successorship’
4- not translating a specific word can easily fool people who don’t know the original meaning/ words. The will see that not translated word as a concept, that is foreign hence they will ask what it means? Leading to a free for all approach to explain it according to personal agendas
5- many people and scholars define and speak about ‘the khilafa’ principle in many ways, yet some sects seem to shove it down our throats as if there’s only one way to look at it and understand it. History taught us not to fall for things this easily. And our expensive scholarship has given the whole idea of chasing worldy power and leadership a very low priority in it’s list of things to be done to achieve the pleasure of God.
Brother Soofian, I’m not entirely sure what you are trying to convey. It seems only that you are rejecting what the other brother is saying, but not stating clearly any opinion about the meaning of Khalifah and Khilafah.
But, have you read the Qasida of Abu Tammam? Where he, praising “‘THE’ khalifah”, AlMutasim, and his family, calls him a “KING”. He says, they are the steady mountain of the KINGS.
القَوْمُ ظِلُّ اللَّهِ أسكَنَ دِينَه فِيهمْ وهُمْ جبَلُ المُلوكِ الرَّاسي
It is evident to everyone during the time, and today as well, that the system of the government for the Abbasid State (الدولة العباسية) was not Khilafh (خلافة)–in the common use of the word–, but rather it was Kingship.
And the basis of Khilafah, established by the Prophet, may Allahr raise him, raise him, and grant him peace, is something you can find in the (detailed) story of what happened between Omar and some of the Muhajreen, one side, and some of the Ansar, on the other side, may Allah be pleased with all of them.
I am, myself, was not aware that the (proper) khalifah has to be from Quraysh.
(I’m not. So it hurts a little, but also gives little relief).
Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam said “At the head of every one hundred years, Allah will send to this nation one who will be a reviver for it its Religion. ” Sunan Abu Dawuud, Kitaab ul-Malaaham, hadeeth no. 4291
Only nine more years to go inshallah and we may get a true leader after all.
ty for this great reminder
1- The authenticity becomes somehow questionable when an extra person is added to the narration. (The translator)
Words are different and the meaning is whatever the translator decided to write.
2- the word khilafah is left untranslated on purpose, other types of ruling systems have been translated. This makes the word stand out and gives the impression that the hadeeth is a ‘khilafah’ hadeeth talking about its return. Whereas if we translate the word khilafah, which can be translated easily, the hadeeth becomes a prophecy about the different ways that muslims will take leading succession one after the other.
3- also to put it simply, the hadeeth in arabic never uses the word khilafah as a defined word or a proper name. The hadeeth -translation- doesn’t say ‘THE’ khilafah. . . It merely says ‘a’ khilafah. Any good arabic speaker will understand it as ‘a successorship’
4- not translating a specific word can easily fool people who don’t know the original meaning/ word. They will see that -none translated- word as a concept, that is foreign hence they will ask what it means? Leading to a free for all approach to explain it according to personal agendas
5- many people and scholars define and speak about ‘the khilafa’ principle in many ways, yet some sects seem to shove it down our throats as if there’s only one way to look at it and understand it. History taught us not to fall for things this easily. And our expensive scholarship has given the whole idea of chasing worldly power and leadership a very low priority in most cases amongst things to be done to achieve the pleasure of God.
6- and the thing that most people forget is that after centuries of Islamic development and expansion of the shariah, after the emergence of different schools of thoughts and progression of different usul in many directions, after rulers came one after the other and to many respects declared herasy on previous schools… Who will we allow today to rule us all? .. will he be a hanafi, a shafiee, a deobandy origin, a sufi, a saudi salafi…? To give an example, a shafiee will deem certain maaliki economic/ finacial views as impermissible!!.
To think that all of us will be united under one ‘quran and sunnah’ version of the shareeah is very naive and ignorant to say the least..
1- The authenticity becomes somehow questionable when an extra person is added to the narration. (The translator)
Words are different and the meaning is whatever the translator decided to write.
2- the word khilafah is left untranslated on purpose, other types of ruling systems have been translated. This makes the word stand out and gives the impression that the hadeeth is a ‘khilafah’ hadeeth talking about its return. Whereas if we translate the word khilafah, which can be translated easily, the hadeeth becomes a prophecy about the different ways that muslims will take leading succession one after the other.
3- also to put it simply, the hadeeth in arabic never uses the word khilafah as a defined word or a proper name. The hadeeth -translation- doesn’t say ‘THE’ khilafah. . . It merely says ‘a’ khilafah. Any good arabic speaker will understand it as ‘a successorship’
4- not translating a specific word can easily fool people who don’t know the original meaning/ word. They will see that -none translated- word as a concept, that is foreign hence they will ask what it means? Leading to a free for all approach to explain it according to personal agendas
5- many people and scholars define and speak about ‘the khilafa’ principle in many ways, yet some sects seem to shove it down our throats as if there’s only one way to look at it and understand it. History taught us not to fall for things this easily. And our expensive scholarship has given the whole idea of chasing worldly power and leadership a very low priority in most cases amongst things to be done to achieve the pleasure of God.
6- and the thing that most people forget is that after centuries of Islamic development and expansion of the shariah, after the emergence of different schools of thoughts and progression of different usul in many directions, after rulers came one after the other and to many respects declared herasy on previous schools… Who will we allow today to rule us all? .. will he be a hanafi, a shafiee, a deobandy origin, a sufi, a saudi salafi…? To give an example, a shafiee will deem certain maaliki economic/ finacial views as impermissible!!.
To think that all of us will be united under one ‘quran and sunnah’ version of the shareeah is very naive and ignorant to say the least..
I’m sure people will have a response to this somehow, but the fallacy is -from experience- that each person will have a different one.. and people can’t unite even on that
While your observation in Item 6 concerning unity from historical perspective is not incorrect, what is wrong with the mindset is giving up on the strive and settling on a perceived, predetermined fait-accompli..no matter how much it seems close to reality. The essence of human creation is struggle and striving for good. One is judged according to this yardstick alone (and sincerity of purpose) and not on the outcome.
The various dogmas with which earlier scholars of the faith struggled with had both the elements of sincerity of purpose/ scholarship and holding fast to the rope of Allah SWT (Quran). Over time, the sincerity got diluted, the grip on the rope slackened, political swindling crept into so-called scholarship, and above all lust for money and power. The unity could be achieved but we have to trace our way back to the origin where there was an Islamic state organized and perfected, and start the journey anew.
Soofian, why are you very angry. Reality is, Quraan is to prevail. You, people, keep mentioning Islam as something independent of the book, and this is why you included Sufism as an Islamic sect. My guess is that you also understand that someone who does not follow the Quraan or the Prophet, may Allah grant him peace, intentionally (and publicly say so) is not Muslim.
On the basis that you seem to be comprehending the basic notion of typing on a computer keyboard, I ground my guess. Otherwise, you are lying. And that is the end of it. If you open the Quraan and see utterance of nonsense, then you are basically one of the people who Allah has blinded (إنا جعلنا على أبصارهم غشاوة أن يفقهوه).
And, also, YES! I am Takfeeri— I believe in the existence of non-Muslims (regardless of what you should do about that, I do believe).
Dear Brother Goofy Sufi,
We believe in what our Lord has revealed and what His Nabi SAW has brought. We don’t go into the nonsensical details as the Murtadeen, the kuffar, the Munafiqeen nor the goofy Sufis.
Have a miserable day 🙂
Assalaamualaikum,
MashaAllah very good article. Please check the article for missing “h” letters.
JazakAllah khair
Maa’shAllah tabarakAllah a very good piece of writing.
We need to look to ourselves if we ever want return of the Caliphate. That is to say that we need to better our knowledge and practice of our deen. Then things will fall into place inshaAllah TaAllah. Unfortunately you have a whole array of so called Muslim leaders who side with the Western interpretation of their own deen and give up their
lands, stock and barrel to the ‘enlightened and helpful’ western powers in the form of ‘ terrorists’ control and economic aid !!!
May Allah swt guide our leaders and make them fear the responsibility of their stations. Aameen
As salam alaikum brother/sister – no matter how much we “look to ourselves” the Caliphate will not be restored this way. The very people who are preventing the Caliphate are the despotic scholars and rulers.