A scholar's reponse to the issue of Khilafah...

I asked a scholar to examine the weight of the argument from a participating member here on GupShup, Musalman, on the issue of Khilafah.

Musalman’s arguments for the case of Khilafah being fard were forwarded to the scholar. The argument and the scholar’s response are shown here at this link.

http://www.understanding-islam.com/rpol/pol-003.htm

There has been interesting discussion at this forum on the issue of Khilafah. Unfortunately, many people did not make their case clear when asked very simple questions. This response from the scholar is meant to make the understanding of the role of Khilafah in Islam more easier overall for all participants.

I would like to add that Muslaman’s argument was unaltered in its content when forwarded and is exactly the same as it has been presented here at Gupshup in the past. Therefore there is no reason to think that the argument has been altered by me. If you would like to see his argument in the original, you can see it here where it is included:
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/Forum13/HTML/001704.html

I hope you genuinely find the response interesting.


They shoot partypoopers, don’t they?

[This message has been edited by Mr Partypooper (edited November 12, 2000).]

Jazakallah for taking the time to find this out.

The response is informative. I've been trying to find out if it is fard for us muslims to have our goal as working for the khilafah.

Musalman, any further words?

I would also appreciate a response from jalal-ud-deen…

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif


They shoot partypoopers, don’t they?

My dear brothers and sisters, Asslamu Alikum,

This is my humble attempt to emphasize the importance of understanding the concept of Khilafah in Islam. I also kindly request any one who would like to reply, to please read this in full from start to finish and present objective replies only.

Statement: Establishing the Khilafah is Fard Al-Kifaya upon Muslims.
Meaning of Fard Kifayah: Collective duty. A duty on all the community; but if it is fulfilled by a part of that community then the rest are not obliged to fulfill it.

Meaning of some related words:
Khalifa Derives from the word Khilafah,
Yakhlufu = come after.
Khulafa = the ones who succeed others, in the sense of standing in as a representative for someone else.
Thus Khalifa = vicegerent, the representative of Allah. Khalifa has two main meanings:

  1. General: It refers to mankind, particularly the believers. See Holy Qur’an, Al-Baqara (2):30. Every Muslim is a Khalifa and should carry the banner of Islam high and strive to establish the Deen of Islam until Allah’s Word is uppermost on the earth.)
  2. Specific: A Muslim ruler. There were four Al-Khulafaa ar-Rashideen, “the rightly-guided Khulafaa”:
     Hazrat Abu Bakar (RA)
     Hazrat Umar (RA)
     Hazrat Uthman (RA)
     Hazrat Ali (RA)

Essence of Khilafah:
Originaly by Dr. Israr Ahmad, Reference used: Maulana Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi ( normally known as Maulana Maududi), translated by Dr. Ahmed Afzaal, further edited and then compiled for this post at PAK.ORG by me (Muhammad Sadiq Salahuddin)

The entire concept of Khilafah is based on the rejection or negation of human sovereignty. The Holy Qur’an repeatedly proclaims that absolute sovereignty belongs to Almighty Allah (SWT) alone. Since human beings cannot claim to be sovereigns, all they are left with, therefore, is vicegerency (Khalifa). Man is not sovereign in his own right, but he is the khalifah of Allah — the vicegerent of God. In Surah Al-Baqarah Allah (SWT) says:

Note that occasion, When your Rabb said to the angels: I am going to place a vicegerent on earth. They said: “Will You place there one who will make mischief and shed blood while we sing Your praises and glorify Your name?” Allah said: I know what you know not [30] He taught Adam the names of all things; then he presented the things to the angels and said: “Tell Me the names of these if what you say is true?” (Allah did this to show Adam’s special qualities of learning and memory). [31] “Glory to You,” they replied, “we have no knowledge except what You have taught us: in fact You are the One who is perfect in knowledge and wisdom.” [32] Allah said: “O Adam! Tell them the names.” When Adam told them the names, Allah said: “Did I not tell you that I know the secrets of the heavens and earth and I know what you revel and what you conceal ?” [33]

First we notice here is that man is the Khalifa “on earth.” What should be examined secondly is the reason of being a “Khalifah.” Which properties have given the man the quality of “being a Khalifa?” as the answer to this question is “He taught Adam the names of all things.” The Man (Insan) has been brought to being along with a capacity and an aptitude to unfold and carry out as much of ALLAH’s countless names as ALLAH wished. The endowment of such a capacity and aptitude to man is what “teaching him all the names” refer to.

Before the institution of prophethood was concluded, the prophets of Allah (SWT) were His vicegerents in their individual capacities, because they used to receive direct revelation from Almighty Allah (SWT), all prophets were His representatives (Khalifa) on earth; they had responsibility for implementing His Orders and executing His Will. This implies that Khilafah, before the conclusion of prophethood, was strictly individual and personal, as it used to be the prerogative of a single person, i.e., the prophet, to implement and execute the orders of the Real Sovereign. Thus, Allah (SWT) has addressed Prophet Daud (AS) in these words: “O Daud! Verily, We have made you a vicegerent in the earth….” (Saad 38:26). Those who know the Arabic language will appreciate that the address here is in second person singular: Allah (SWT) is addressing only Prophet Daud (AS). Thus, Prophet Daud (AS) was a vicegerent of Allah (SWT) in his personal capacity.

Allah (SWT) ended the institution of prophethood after Prophet Muhammad (SAW), Therefore Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was the last person who was a Khlifah of Almighty Allah (SWT) in his personal and individual capacity. The institution of Khilafah can no longer continue as an individual and personal affair after the termination of prophethood, as no one can claim that he is receiving direct revelation from God. Thus, after the demise of the Holy Prophet (SAW), the institution of Khilafah must become the collective affair of the entire Muslim Ummah rather than the individual affair of the prophet. Concerning this, what I had mention in my earlier post at PAK.ORG under How to get Khilafah back, was actually based on what Allah (SWT) says in the Qur’an:

24:55: “Allah has promised those amongst you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that HE will CERTAINLY GRANT them SUCCESSION to the PRESENT RULERS on the EARTH, as HE granted it to those before them; that HE will ESTABLISH in authority their religion – the one which HE has chosen for them; and that HE will change their state, after the fear in which they lived, to one of security and peace: They worship ME alone and not associate ought with Me. IF any do reject Faith after this, they are Rebellious and Wicked.”

Note that the address here is in the third personal plural, which indicates that Khilafah is now for the collectivity of Muslims rather than for any single individual.

There is a very significant point in this which requires our attention. We have just seen how, with the social and intellectual evolution of mankind, Khilafah or vicegerency had to be transformed from an individual responsibility to a collective one. Parallel with this development, the concept and form of human sovereignty has also undergone a crucial transformation. Before the advent of democracy, human sovereignty used to be an individual matter, i.e., a king or monarch would rule the masses according to his personal wishes; now, however, this too has become a collective affair. With the development of the concept of democracy, we now have popular sovereignty instead of individual sovereignty. But note that popular sovereignty is as hateful an evil as individual sovereignty, as both represent a state of rebellion against the Creator. We have ourselves given kingship the garb of people’s rule (Democracy), when we saw man becoming self-conscious and independent. The point to be noted here is that there is no essential difference between individual sovereignty or monarchy on the one hand and collective sovereignty or democracy on the other. Both are different manifestations of political shirk, both are Satanic in origin, both represent rebellion against God. It was the impact of the liberating teachings of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) in the form of the Just Social Order of Islam that caused common people to realize their rights, and raised their level of self-consciousness and self-respect. Realizing that man is becoming conscious of his status and capabilities and becoming more and more free from all kinds of bondage, Satan saw that it would no longer be possible to lure human beings into submitting before monarchs and autocrats. He, therefore, turned the “king’s right to rule” into the “rule of the masses,” hiding the filth of human sovereignty behind the attractive veneer of democracy. Despite their differences, therefore, both democracy and monarchy are based on the assumption that human beings have the absolute right to rule —individually in the first case, collectively in the latter — and this is clearly un-Islamic!

Short Summery:
In summary, Khilafah is the political system in Islam. It is responsible for implementing the Islamic system (be it social, economic, educational, foreign policy,…) and maintaining its implementation. It is also responsible for spreading the message of Islam to the world. Khilafah is the Islamic state which the Prophet (pbuh) sought to create and worked for in Mecca, for a period of thirteen years, until he (pbuh) established it Medina. Ibn Hisham, the famous narrator of the Sirah of the Prophet (pbuh) says regarding the establishment of the Islamic State in Madine: “When the Prophet (pbuh) was assured and satisfied in Madina and when his brothers from Muhajireen (migrators) were gathered with him in Madina along with his brothers from the Ansar (helpers), Islam was firmly established so the prayer was established, the Zakah and Sawm (fasting) were obligated, the hudud (punishment) were established, halal and haram was obligated and Islam was in power among them.”

My second reply was in conjunction with my earlier post: which talked about NATION STATES and the disunity and it also talked about creation of over 56 different NATION STATES.

As I had clearly written QUOTE “Why Disunity & Nationalism is Forbidden
(Below are some verses from Quran, about Islamic Unity)” UNQUOTE

Arguments presented by our honorable brother:

  1. QUOTE “The verses referred to substantiate the prohibition of disunity and nationalism among Muslims are all, in fact, related to the prohibition of religious disunity (as in forming sects) and not the forming of independent geographical states (as is quite obvious from the words of most of these verses). It should be kept in mind that the formation of independent geographical states does not necessarily imply disunity among these states. The thing to strive for, in the light of these verses, is to remove the sectarian spirit that has taken hold of the Muslims and to remove all forms of religious disunity among them.” UNQUOTE

Reply: Our honorable friend has said it right, couple of things that I like to point out here is that I did not meant ISLAM to be a religion, ISLAM is not a RELIGION. ISLAM is a DEEN. It is commonly perceived that DEEN can be translated as RELIGION, while it is translated as RELIGION, but it is our duty to understand it in the context of DEEN when we read this word ONLY as a RELIGION it will mean “the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or any such system of belief and worship.” As such ISLAM cannot be fully understand in the context of RELIGION, because ISLAM (submission to the will of ALLAH) is DEEN (life-transaction or a complete way of life) divinely reveled by ALLAH (SWT) .

“LA ILAHA ILL-ALLAH” constitute the basis of our DEEN.
LA means “there is no” ILAH means “God”, that is “a being to be worshipped.” Then, ILL-ALLAH follows as an explanation: ILLA meaning “only,” “ALLAH” It does not even say “there is ALLAH”; it simply says “only ALLAH” So “There is no God, Only ALLAH” and ALLAH revealed a DEEN called ISLAM. DEEN in fact meaning ‘life-transaction’, the transaction being between Allah (SWT) and each of his created beings. The DEEN of Allah (SWT) is universal. It is the way of Islam (submission of will to Allah (SWT).

So while the verses relate to dividing the DEEN (life transaction or a complete way of life) in religious (DEEN) sects (A group of people forming a distinct unit within a larger group by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice) is very much consistent with dividing the UMMAH into SOVEREIGN NATION STATES, which was the real theme of that post and not “independent geographical states”. Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan and so on more then 56 Muslims countries claim sovereignty, through their constitutions (under UN charter), but yet we know that sovereignty belongs to ONLY ALLAH, Man at best can only claim vicegerency. So, how is it that dividing the Ummah into over 56 SOVEREIGN NATION STATES does not constitute as mere sects (A group of people forming a distinct unit within a larger group by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice) in DEEN (life transaction or a complete way of life). If it is un-Islamic then it is a divide in the religion (DEEN). Is this the way this Ummah claim to be the vicegerent (Khalifah) of Allah (SWT) on this planet?

  1. QUOTE “The aspect which is condemned in the narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) under the title, “Hadeeth on Nationalism”, is “`asbiyyah”. When ascription and faithfulness toward one’s country becomes more important than faithfulness toward the directives of God and submission to the truth, it then becomes a refutation of the very basis of the message of Islam. In other words, a Muslim can never be of the view: “My country, right or wrong”.” UNQUOTE

Reply: I totally agree with our honorable brother, as we see that Sovereignty of Allah is been put aside by forming mere sects in DEEN by creating SOVEREIGN NATION STATES. So in a way our more then 56, SOVEREIGN NATION STATES are considered legitimate, but where is the Sovereignty of ALLAH? So by rejecting the Sovereignty of Allah (SWT) all these so called SOVEREIGN NATION STATES are un-Islamic. Then again is this how this Ummah is claiming to be the vicegerent (Khalifah) of Allah (SWT) on this planet?

  1. QUOTE “The verse cited under the title: “How to get the Khilaafah back”, is not even closely related to the subject. Keeping the context and the words of the verse in perspective, it is clear that it addresses the companions of the Prophet (pbuh) and the promise entailed in the verse is, in fact, related to their special position as the direct addressees of a messenger of God. The promise entailed in the verse does not extend to all Muslims other than the companions of the Prophet (pbuh)” UNQUOTE

Reply: The answer and interpretation to this can be found in the above text; “Essence of Khilaafa [Originaly by Dr. Israr Ahmad based on a lecture by Maulana Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi, translated by Dr. Ahmed Afzaal, further compiled and edited for this post at PAK.ORG by Me (Muhammad Sadiq Salahuddin)] Please refer to specific section of the text that discusses the said verse.

  1. QUOTE “The final citation, under the title “Hadeeth Regarding Future of Khilaafah” has been interpreted even by some of its narrators to be referring to the rule of Umar ibn Abd al-Azeez. However, if this interpretation is not accepted to be correct, even then the most that can derived from this narrative is that the Prophet (pbuh) foretold the reestablishment of “Khilaafah” (whatever it implied). This does not, as is quite clear, render the establishment of the “Khilaafah” (implying a universal Islamic state) an obligation upon all Muslims.”

Reply: The above Hadeeth was quoted by me as a great news for Muslim Ummah about the coming of Khilafah and was not meant to imply any obligation upon Muslims regarding the establishment of Khilafah. According to several traditions of the Holy Prophet (SAW), the domination of Islam on a global level is bound to come, and almost all the Ulema’s are unanimous about it. There are lots of Daleels about the upcoming worldwide domination of Islam. Please also read “The future is for Islam” under Religion at Pak.org

My dear brothers and sisters to establish this Ummah as a Khalifa of Allah (SWT) is a collective obligation of the entire Ummah (Fard Al-Kifaya). So that this world is ruled by the ISLAMIC WORLD ORDER and not by any NEW WORLD ORDER.

Oh ALLAH (SWT), Please forgive this humble servant of yours if this servant has made any mistakes in the above text. For all Ilim belong to ALLAH (SWT) and ALLAH knows best and ALLAH knows it all.

[This message has been edited by Musalman (edited November 15, 2000).]

This what the scholar said:

[quote]
Originally posted by the scholar:
**
My dear brother, it should be kept in mind that declaring something to be obligatory is not the jurisdiction of the scholars and students of Islam. It is the sole authority of the Almighty. Declaring something to be obligatory, without the authority of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, is a great transgression and a person guilty of such transgression shall be accountable for it on the Day of Judgment. It is for this reason that I would generally have no objections on what a movement plans to do, as long as its actions are morally and legally justifiable. However, when a movement declares something to be Haraam (prohibited) or Fardh (obligatory) or even a nafl (supererogatory), it is my duty to ask for the basis of such declaration in the Qur’an or the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh), as without such basis, all such declarations are a condemnable invention in the body of Islam.**
[/quote]

Remember this is very important. You will be accountable on the Day of Judgement if you give us ignorant people the wrong idea about Islam. It doesn't matter whether you think you have an obligation to inform people about this. If it is not right in the first place then you will be accountable on the Day of Judgement to Allah Almighty Himself. So you have a vested interest in learning only the correct Islamic ruling on this issue...

So I ask you again:

Give me just one commandment from the Qur'an and Sunnah which categorically and unambiguously states that to establish Khilafah is fard upon the muslims.

This is very simple to understand.


They shoot partypoopers, don't they?

[This message has been edited by Mr Partypooper (edited November 14, 2000).]

My dear brother I have not declared in the above text or any where “something to be obligatory”. Man (Insan) does not do that, because our Master Allah (SWT) does it. Man (Insan) should humbly determine what his Master Allah (SWT) commands obligatory upon him. This is exactly what has been done in the Islamic history and also in the above commentary RF: Original document by Dr. Israr Ahmad; refrence used: Maulana Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi ( normally known as Maulana Maududi), translated by Dr. Ahmed Afzaal, further edited and then compiled for this post at PAK.ORG by me(Muhammad Sadiq Salahuddin). It has been commented not declared in the above commentary that “Establishing the Khilafah is Fard Al-Kifaya upon Muslims.” This also, has been the unanimous finding of numerous Ulema of Islam.

The above commentary has already presented an answer to your question:
“Give me just one commandment from the Qur'an and Sunnah which categorically and unambiguously states that to establish Khilafah is fard upon the muslims.”

In fact the above commentary point out to more then just one Verse, which categorically depended on at theleast the Tafseer of Al-Quran to acquire the essence of Allah (SWT) words, neither does the above commentary exhibit any ambiguity or uncertainty in establishing the fact that, “Establishing the Khilafah is Fard Al-Kifaya upon Muslims” The verses mentioned above are very unambiguous in explaining the essence of what is meant by “Khilafah”

So, brother, please read the reply in full and try to understand the real meaning of “Khiafah”. Also, if you want to reply then kindly acknowledge that you have read my post in full from start to finish.

I invite people to categorically and unambiguously point out if “Establishing Khilafah is unIslamic”. I also invite people to do their own research in this subject, while I will continue to study this subject my self. Let all of us be not in darkness relating to this subject, as we should shed light on it and try to understand the real meaning and the essence of the word “Khilafah” and find out for ourselves that “Establishing the Khilafah is Fard Al-Kifaya upon Muslims.” We shell also ask our learned scholars a question;

“Establishing the Khilafah is Fard Al-Kifaya upon Muslims.” Or NOT.

[This message has been edited by Musalman (edited November 14, 2000).]

As you said, we should find out if it is fard or not.

I have already reached my conclusion on this issue in the light of responses from various people.

My opinion is that it is not fard upon any muslim, individual or otherwise, to eastablish Khilafah.


They shoot partypoopers, don't they?

Brother Mr Partypooper, kindly enlighten us all through the knowledge (Ilm) of Quran and Sunnah as to how did you conclude to your opinion. We will be waiting for your answer.

Brother Musalman,

I have read all your posts. When I ask you to give me one one directive which categorically and unambiguously states that it is fard upon every Muslim to establish the Khilafah, you ask me to go back and read your posts again. I have been asking this question from the beginning. I have read all your posts. I was not convinced. I have even asked a scholar to read your posts. He is not convinced that you have answered my question. If he is not convinced, then I am not convinced. And I can tell you that I have never been convinced from the beginning about this issue. You may say that my or the scholar's interpretation of Islam is wrong. But let me tell you: I am more confident with a scholar's mistakes than yours.

Even the article which you posted which was by Israr Ahmed did not convince me that to establish the Khilafah is fard upon every muslim.

So you tell me... what am I supposed to do?


They shoot partypoopers, don't they?

My dear brothers and sisters
The above commentary is not the original document by Dr. Israr Ahmad. I had summarized and used only parts of the original document because the original document is very lengthy and also include the framework of the Khilaafah, which was outside the scope of this topic. For those who are interested in reading the original document, please visit the following Website:
http://www.tanzeem.org/research/articles/framework.htm

The original document also uses as reference the work of: Mawlana Sayyid Abul A’la Mawdudi
Those who are interested in knowing who Mawlana Mawdudi was, can go to the following website:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/4321/bio-2.html

[This message has been edited by Musalman (edited November 16, 2000).]

This discussion is interesting.

Brother Musalman, why dont you just cite the verses which the scholars that you trust have cited in their books (Mududi and Dr. Ahmad). If they have provided any reliable reference, brother partypooper would accept your opinion (right brother partypooper?) while if they have not, then you should stop calling the establishment of Khilafa a fard. After all, it is not Mududdi or Ahmad that are the lawgivers of Islam. It is actually the Quran.

I though it might benefit me and all to know that the scholar at 'Understanding Islam' has also written a book in Urdu, which provides a complete rebuttal of Dr. Ahmad's alleged stages in an Islamic revolution, which he has (allegedly) derived from the Seerat of the Prophet (sws)

You can find information abt this book at:
http://www.understanding-islam.com/books/book16.htm

Muslaman: Assalam-Alaikum

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

I personally think it is very good that your iman is strong enough to want to speak to people about islam.

The issue I see here is that a lot of young brothers who want to learn about Islam, are being fed a lot of information about building Khilfah. They are not starting out by reading and understanding the Quran, or by learning about the Sunnah of our Beloved Prophet Muhammed, or by learning the virtues of being a Muslim. Yet they have been given such a biased view on Islam that this is all they speak about.

It is quite disturbing, if you speak to these people about the quran, they get impatient as they belive “there is no solution to the muslims, apart from building one unified Khilafah state”.

Brother Musalman, please explain to me where it states that building a khilafah is fard upon me. It is fard upon me to protect my brothers and sisters in Islam. It is fard upon me to be good to my parents. It is fard upon me to fight for islam. It is fard upon me to give Zakat.

Where does it say that it is fard upon me “to build ONE unified Khilafah state”???

I would appreciated a short answer to this, preferable one that just includes references to Qurand and Hadith.

Jazakallah

Here's what i opsted in another thread...i will reply to all your posts soon..clearing out any misconceptions...

The Issue of Khilafah

The evidence about the obligation of working towards the establishment of the Islamic State is conclusive in text (the Qur'an and the Sunnah) and in meaning; hence, whoever denies this Fard is a Kafir. As for he who acknowledges this fact but does not work towards it, he is sinful. Evidence for
this is reflected in the texts which command the Muslims to abide by and refer their affairs to the Islamic Shariah. It is also reflected in the texts which forbid the Muslims from referring their affairs
to other than the Islamic Shariah: Allah (SWT) says:
"As for the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hand." [T.M.Q. Al-Maidah 5 : 38 ]
He (SWT) says:
"The woman and the man guilty of fornication lash each of them a hundred lashes."[T.M.Q An-Nur 24:2]
Allah (SWT) says:
"They wish to go for judgment to Taghut (False judges etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them..." [T.M.Q. An-Nisa 4 : 60]
Allah (SWT) also says:
"But no, by your Lord, they can have no faith until they make you judge in all disputes between them." [T.M.Q. An-Nisa 4:65]
And there are many other Shariah texts to that effect. Hence, the largest part of the Shariah rules would be suspended in the absence of an Islamic State, for which the Ummah is responsible.
It is also conclusive in text and in meaning that this action must be undertaken by every Muslim with their utmost capability. Any Muslim who denies this would be a Kafir, and he who neglects it would be sinful. The evidence for this is obtained from the texts which have come to confirm and establish this meaning: Allah (SWT) says:
"So fear Allah as much as you can." [T.M.Q. Al-Hajj 22:73]
He (SWT) also says:
"On no soul does Allah place a burden greater than it can bear." [T.M.Q. Al-Baqarah 2:286]
This means that a person should give the utmost of his ability, not the half, or the minimum. And, when He (SWT) says:
"So fear Allah as much as you can." [T.M.Q.Al-Hajj 22:73] ,
this means that one should fear and obey Allah to the maximum of his ability, not half of it.

As for the Sunnah, Nafi‘a reported saying: “ ‘Umar said to me that he heard the Prophet (saw) saying: Whoso takes off his hand from allegiance to Allah (swt) will meet Him (swt) on the Day of Resurrection without having any proof for him, and whoso dies whilst there was no bay‘ah (allegiance or a pledge) on his neck (to a Khaleefah), he dies a death of jahilliyah.”

So the Prophet (saw) made it compulsory upon every Muslim to have a bay‘ah on his neck, and described whoever dies without a bay‘ah on his neck that he dies a death of jahilliyah. The bay‘ah cannot be for anyone except the Khaleefah, and the Prophet (saw) made it obligatory upon every Muslim to have on his neck a bay‘ah to a Khaleefah.

In regard with the Ijma‘a of the Sahabah they all agreed upon the necessity to establish a successor or Khaleefah to the Prophet (saw) after his death, and they all agreed to appoint a successor to Abu Bakr, then to ‘Umar, then to ‘Uthman, after the death of each one of them. The Ijma‘a of the Sahabah to establish a Khaleefah manifested itself emphatically when they delayed the burial of the Prophet (saw) after his death whilst engaged in appointing a successor to him, despite the fact that the burial of the dead person is fard, and that it is haram upon those who are supposed to prepare for his burial to engage themselves in anything else until they complete the burial. The Sahabah were obliged to engage themselves in preparing the burial of the Prophet (saw), instead some of them engaged themselves in appointing a Khaleefah rather than carrying out the burial, and some others kept silent on this engagement and participated in delaying the burial for two nights despite their ability to deny the delay and their ability to bury the Prophet (saw). So this was an Ijma‘a to engage themselves in appointing a Khaleefah rather than to bury the dead. This could not be legitimate unless the appointment of a Khaleefah is more obligatory than the burial of the dead.
Also, all the Sahabah agreed throughout their lives upon the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah.

Although they disagreed upon the person to elect as a Khaleefah, they never disagreed upon the appointment of a Khaleefah, neither when the Prophet (saw) died, nor when any of the Khulafa’a ar-Rashidun died. Therefore the Ijma‘a of the Sahabah is a clear and strong evidence that the appointment of a Khaleefah is obligatory.

[This message has been edited by jalal_ud_deen (edited November 17, 2000).]

Another cut and paste - why are you trying to make it difficult?

Brothers, lets try to present the research on this subject in an objective manner. If we have to cut & paste, then we should try to do our best to summarize the original document. But all in all if the only way a brother thinks he can make his point across, is through cut & paste then it should be acceptable to us. We should all read the posts in full. After all it is knowledge. All brothers, please be kind enough to mention to us at the beginning of your post, about the nature of your post. Meaning total cut and paste, summery of an original document or commentary based on personal / scholar's work, also the source of your document, reference if you may have used and please do not forget to put some kind of concluding comments. This way it will make it clear to all of us as to what is the essence of the post / message. All brothers should read all posts in full, regardless if they are cut & paste or not, who knows we may be able to understand an important message from a cut & paste job.

The article that brother Jalad-Ud-Deen has posted points to Shariah rule being important.

Nobody disputes this. We need to live under Allah's laws.

However, there is no proof there that we would be sinful if we didn't work to create One Unified Islamic State

Can you tell me the last time there was One Unified Islamic State

Brothers, plz don't ignore this question, and no more cut and paste jobs please.

Brother CoolDude kindly let brothers cut & paste as I had said earlier we may be able to extract an important message out of a cut and paste job. I had suggested a posting format in my earlier post, hopefully it will be acceptable to all brothers.

Message that brother jalal_ud_deen post contain is that Islamic laws cannot be implemented in individual capacity of Muslims. There has to be an authority, which is responsible to Implement the Islamic Laws, and that Authority is the State.

One very important thing that I have noticed is lots of brothers are thinking in terms of establishing khilaafah is to establish One Unified Islamic State. Establishing khilaafah does not necessarily imply to establishment of a Unified Islamic State. Apparently we are confusing two issues here one is establishing khilaafah and the other is establishing a unified Islamic State.

Establishing khilaafah means to reject human sovereignty and accept Allah (SWT) Sovereignty on earth. Since human beings cannot claim to be sovereigns, all they are left with, therefore, is vicegerency (khalifa). Man is not sovereign in his own right, but he is the khalifah of Allah — the vicegerent of Allah (SWT).

Establishing a unified Islamic State is one of the ways of the framework of establishing khilaafah. Which is debatable.

So, lets not get confused and mix the issues!

[This message has been edited by Musalman (edited November 17, 2000).]

InshAllah, I will present more research on this topic, as time permits.