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

Society Religion & Philosophy
61

Mr. PartyPooper,

All referrences are their, except for the Hadith at the end: that is narrated in Muslim.

I would also like to point out a certain danger:

Mioz Amjad, just because he owns a web Page, doesn't imply he is a scholar.

I don't say someone, is not a scholar, for no reason, but rather, the case is established, if he contradicts definite and conclusive text.

Firstly, the issue of the Khilafah is definite. He contradicted this.

Secondly, he contradicts the hadith: "He who changes his deen Kill Him"

[quote]

**
In a nutshell, I do not ascribe to the opinion that the punishment for apostasy is death. As I shall explain in the following paragraphs, in my opinion, the Shari`ah has not fixed any punishment for apostasy. I must also point out here that there is, more or less, a consensus among the scholars that an apostate should be killed. But I think that the basis of this opinion of the Muslim scholars is questionable.
**

[/quote]

Thirdly, if you read his web pages, he contradicts many Laws of Islam which are definite, and doesn't seem to understand how to derive Hukm's, since one of the sources, he keeps reffering to is his Mind/Aql.

We should also remember, that contradicting definite text takes someone outside of Islam, [unless done through ignorance].

[This message has been edited by jalal_ud_deen (edited November 30, 2000).]

62

Dear brother jalal…

I have explained my reasons for needing your help on this matter. If Moiz is wrong then at least he should know right? Please provide the references as he has kindly asked you to do.

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

This matter is to our mutual benefit as I’m sure you will readily agree.

Thank you kindly.

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

They shoot partypoopers, don’t they?

63

Mr Partypooper,

You have asked for references for certain evidences. Most of these have been provided. And as Jalal said the last hadith is in Muslim.

Al-Ahkam al Sultaniyyah, is a small book and the quote, quoted is near the beginning of the book.[please advise him to also read the whole book, it may increase his knowlegde, on this matter]

The quote from Imam Jozairi is in Volume 5,which stays the same whether in English or Arabic.

i myself, am not brilliant at reading Arabic, hence, I have English books. The texts that have been quoted, have been quoted by numerous books I have read in English and not neccesarily these specific books, hence I can only provide you with the references that these other books gave and i subsequently wrote down.

Please ask Moiz Amjad to read all these books, and especially recommend him to read books on Usul ul Fiqh, eg the Muqadimmah.

Also, I doubt that the above references would be of any use to Moiz Amjad, since he doesn't mind contradicting all the scholars and definite text, as Brother Jalal pointed out above.

64

An excellent leaflet that had to be posted:

from www.khilafah.com

[This message has been edited by jalal_ud_deen (edited December 05, 2000).]

65

Hizb-ut-Tahrir are not the only muslims in this world with solutions for today's problems. Although what they say is true and inshallah their Iman is very strong, Islam is a deen and it is a complete deen.

Therefore, this is not the only solution for today's issues with muslims. There are countless others, including Jihad.

66

Cool Dude,
Islam as you rightly say is a deen.How can you have this manifested in life without the Khilafah?
As for jihad.How can you have jihad without an Amir or an army?

67

We have Jihad right now in Chechnya, Palestine, Kashmir, and other areas.

How nieve to suggest that without the unified islamic state, nothing is attainable. Allah has perfected our din for us, don't pick and choose what parts of Islam are important and what are not.

68

I should apologise firstly for responding so late.

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

I have been waiting for a week for jalal to provide those references from the original books. No such luck. He hasn’t posted anything relevant. The best he could do was to post an old leaflet that I have seen HT handing out years ago. It may say 1999, but it is in reality much older than that.

As a result I am disappointed in his reluctance to forward those proofs. I really should not have to ask twice in order to get a simple message across. If he feels that he is right then why does he not feel comfortable in forwarding the original references? Lets see what he said in response to my request that he provide the sources from the original books:

I see. It is somewhat obvious that he not even comprehended my question. I have already pointed out that I do not want the translation sources for the reasons outlined above. Moiz Amjad wants the references to the original books because those are the only books he has.

In fact instead of sincerely responding to my request, jalal instead launches a personal attack on Moiz Amjad himself. This is somewhat strange as he says earlier:

Dare I say it… a trifle hypocritical?

Is this the first time that this has happened? No. In fact the moderator of this forum had to edit his reply earlier:

Dear jalal, I do not know what you said in your reply. It may have been directed against me or more likely it was blackzero that had to bear the brunt of your response. Frankly, I do not care what you said. It is obvious that you feed upon your ideas with an extreme emotional frenzy. Anyone who dares to remark against your judgement is treated by you with utter disrespect. At long last, have you no decency?

‘O you who believe! Shun much suspicion for truly some suspicion is a sin. And spy not, neither back-bite one another. Would one of you love to eat the flesh of his dead brother? You hate that (so hate the other)! And keep your duty to Allah. Surely, Allah is Forgiving and the most Kind.’(49:12)

Anyway, I asked jalal again to provide me those references. But no. He would not. The best he could do was to provide discursive comments on where it might be found in the books. And he continued his attacks on Moiz Amjad:

This is far from satisfactory.

Jalal is not entitled to his self-righteousness. He has obviously not thought the matter through. On a subject such as that of the issue of Khilafah in Islam, where the hopes of hundreds of millions are at stake, thinking things through is not just good intellectual practice. It is a moral duty.

And that means providing the references to the original material. But it is self-evident that jalal does not care to get the references to the original material.

As for his attacks on Moiz Amjad and myself: I have some professional advice for jalal. If you plan to engage in character assassination, it pays to do some homework. With modern technology, it’s quite easy. All I had to do was type in “jalal-ud-deen” and click the mouse to get all kinds of interesting information, from stories about the unrelenting efforts of jalal to give Mohammed Ali Jinnah a central role as a “fasik” and traitor to Pakistan - to the fact that jalal insults other people personally who question the credibility of the Hizb-ut-Tahrir cult. Might I suggest that jalal type in “Moiz Amjad” or “Mr Partypooper” and see what he gets? He might be surprised.

In fact, when the moderator of this forum had to cut him short then he replied:

Dare I say it… a trifle hypocritical?

Isn’t Moiz Amjad one of those relevant parties? He is not here. So why are you slandering him behind his own back?

‘O you who believe! Shun much suspicion for truly some suspicion is a sin. And spy not, neither back-bite one another. Would one of you love to eat the flesh of his dead brother? You hate that (so hate the other)! And keep your duty to Allah. Surely, Allah is Forgiving and the most Kind.’(49:12)

I would like to offer an answer to that question. Since the issue of Khilafah is one of the founding principles of Hizb-ut-Tahrir, anyone who questions the credibility of this principle in the light of Islam is in fact questioning the credibility of the right of Hizb-ut-Tahrir to exist as a group. And there you have it in a nutshell.

This is why jalal has to resort to scare tactics in order to frighten these people who dare to question. For example:

E’nuff said. There you have the mind of HT at work. Jalal seems to throw the word kafir about a little too lightly when it suits his purposes. And the peculiar thing is that it is the notion of whether it is conclusive in the Qur’an and Sunnah that various parties (including me) in this thread have grappled over. And although that is the important part of the discussion, jalal seems content to reply to with cut & paste material which has no authentic references to the original books.

And the scare tactics explain why jalal is eager to pursue his attacks on the knowledge that Moiz Amjad has attained. To cut a long story short, jalal is afraid of Moiz Amjad. To jalal, for somebody to question the credibility of Hizb-ut-Tahrir is no small matter.

If jalal is so uncomfortable with the views of the scholar of Moiz Amjad then why does he not confront him with his own views? There is no easier way to contact Moiz Amjad than to e-mail the man himself through his website, which many people do daily. Moiz Amjad responds to each and every one of those queries.

The best answer I have is that it does not seem to be in jalal’s interests to do so. Unlike the scholar Moiz Amjad, jalal does not seem to be after the truth judging by his own actions. If he was after the truth of the matter, then he would have communicated directly with the scholar above as mentioned and he would have somehow assauged his concerns. He obviously has not. Instead he has tried to sway the direction of the dialogue in this thread. Because of jalal’s insecurity, he has tried to inject doubt by questioning the credibility of Moiz Amjad as a scholar. If he was really thorough with his analysis of the scholar’s website, he would have noticed that Moiz Amjad’s credentials and resume were available there. In fact his teacher’s resume is also available. His colleague’s resume is also available. All the credentials testify that all are indeed scholars of Islam through their education, teaching and experience.

So where does the issue of questioning Moiz Amjad’s position as a scholar arise?

But jalal seems to be on a mini-crusade. He attacks the scholar’s views on apostasy. These are views which I happen to agree with. So why bring irrelevant items into the discussion? So why is jalal deliberately trying his best to change the subject of this thread?

Furthermore, jalal thinks that Moiz Amjad thinks too much of his own opinion. Jalal has missed the point. Moiz Amjad’s opinion is based upon the Qur’an and the Sunnah. In fact, Moiz Amjad has declared this repeatedly and backed it up with apropriate references where necessary.

As usual, jalal seems to hang himself with his own rope a little too easily.

I am here to discuss the issue of Khilafah. Full stop. Period. If jalal wants to discuss another issue then open another thread.

And another thing, jalal. It is completely obvious to everybody that you and abdul_kareem are the same person. Some people would request you to go and see a therapist if you insist on talking to yourself. You are not going to gain anything by pretending to amass support for your position. Just because everybody here is critical of your own beliefs, does not mean that you have to pretend to go “undercover”. For example:

Jalal and abdul_kareem obviously love each other to bits. I find this somewhat unnerving.

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

This thread is full of little things like these that jalal likes to hear himself. That is wishful thinking. Going “undercover” is one of those things that Hizb-ut-Tahrir encourages because it’s own ideology is based upon conspiracy theories. Strictly speaking, inventing other nicks in order to deceive others is simply another case of deliberately lying to others. If jalal feels so free in order to practice such deceit whenever he feels like it, then how can he feel so qualified in derogating sincere scholars who know what they are talking about? Since jalal has been established of lying already, does it therefore not cross the minds of all participants of this forum that what he says is inherently unreliable?

Dare I say it… a trifle hypocritical for jalal to expect that others should conform to his views without question?

Anyway, that is enough of that. I apologise for boring everybody.

In another thread, brother stunned asked whether this discussion will be complete.

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

Insh’Allah it will be so. I have only one more thing to say.

If you remember jalal included the following as one of his replies earlier on:

These claims are unsubstantiated as shown below. In fact, jalal has interpreted the word Khilafah completely wrong.

Since jalal was unwilling to apprach the scholar Moiz Amjad himself on the issue of Khilafah, I forwarded him a number of questions based on this topic. I also asked him to comment on Musalman’s most recent reply in this thread.

I asked:

*I would be extremely grateful if you could help in defining the terms Khilafah and Imarah and their implications. These seems to be a topic on which there seem to be a number of differing opinions i.e. whether Khilafah or Imarah is fard or not, I suspect, seems to depend directly upon the perceived definition of the terms.

As I see it, there are several questions that come to my mind. What is the definition of Khilafah and Imarah as stipulated by the Qur’an and the Sunnah? Furthermore, how is an injunction from the Qur’an and Sunnah on an issue such as that of Khilafah and Imarah classed as fard? Would you agree with the above statements presented by the brother? Given the definitions and the relevant information, how do the sources given in the above article testify to the learned author’s opinion? From your extensive knowledge of Islam, what do the famous classical juristic scholars say about the issue of Khilafah being fard?*

His answer is at the following address:

http://www.understanding-islam.com/rpol/pol-004.htm

At the beginning of his reply he mentioned:

*The two words (‘Khilaafah’ and ‘Imaarah’[1]) are used, more or less, as synonymous. Neither of these words is a term. Both are used in their literal meaning and implication, which is ‘rule’, ‘government’ etc[2]. In the modern times, however, these words have been used to imply a single universal Muslim state. Thus, those who ascribe to this modern implication of the word refuse to use these words for the existing Muslim governments. They hold that only that Muslim government can be called a ‘Khilaafah’, which represents the whole Muslim community of the world. In other words, when all the Muslim states (or communities) are united under one rule, only that government or rule can be called ‘Khilaafah’. In my opinion, this implication is neither supported by the literal meaning of these words nor by its usage in the classical Muslim literature, including the Qur’an or Hadith.

In view of the above, it is imperative, in my opinion, that those who restrict the implication of these words only to a universal, single Muslim government must first establish the correctness of their interpretation of these words from the Arabic language or from the usage of the word in the Qur’an and Hadith.

To understand the gravity of the difference of opinion, which originates from the difference of interpretation of these terms, let us take up a few examples:*

These examples are shown in the link provided above. I encourage everybody to analyse the question and the answer completely. These examples are important because they show how Hizb-ut-Tahrir has not only twisted the meaning of the word Khilafah but ignored the context of the quotes completely. The scholar refers to what the famous classical scholar Ibn Katheer meant on his commentary on the Qur’an when he mentioned Qurtabi’s interpretation of the verse which Musalman pointed out. Moiz Amjad also refers to two hadeeth from Muslim and as an example shows that the meaning of these have been misinterpreted by those who think that the word Khilafah means something else other than its real true meaning.

As a result, all the fifty or so quotes that jalal provided above do not support or endorse his views at all. In fact, those quotes where he has provided them, actually construe a meaning that is completely different from what he would apparently like to believe.

Therefore, Hizb-ut-Tahrir has no credibility in this regard. Since they claim that establishing a universal Islamic State is fard upon every Muslim, then they are wrong. Thus Hizb-ut-Tahrir have committed a blunder in their arrogance in assuming that they know what they are talking about. They do not know the meaning of the word Khilafah. Hizb-ut-Tahrir have declared something in Islam to be fard when in reality, Islam does not endorse such an opinion. As the scholar has pointed out numerous times before:

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.

And there you have it. In it’s own arrogance, Hizb-ut-Tahrir have committed an act of bid’ah.

Case closed.

Adil.
(Mr Partypooper)

They shoot partypoopers, don’t they?

[This message has been edited by Mr Partypooper (edited December 07, 2000).]

69

I should add something further.

As I said, we should be grateful to jalal for responding to this issue with his replies, which tells us all that we need to know about his ideas, and more than we wanted to know about his character. The interesting question is what all this says about those who trust in him - above all, about HT.

After all, the one thing that even HT's opponents always say is that they are seemingly well organised. But that is it.

I know jalal personally. We used to be good friends. And I fear that he may be giving the wrong idea of himself - that he is one of those angry, paranoid, everyone-who-disagrees-with-me-is-an-idiot-or-corrupt, the-liberal-media-are-conspiring-against-us types. So we may well ask: what's a nice guy like jalal doing with an extreme group like Hizb-ut-Tahrir?

They shoot partypoopers, don't they?

70

Stop calling me Jalal, PartyPooper!

Secondly, I have read the resumes of Moiz Amjad and his tutor etc.[A long time ago] This gave me no indictaions of whether he is a scholar. When someone says to me, that this person is a scholar, I say, OK. And thats until he contradicts definite text-text which is clear in meaning-and this shows how much of a scholar someone is, hence the above point was to demonstrate this. [the point about the apostate]

Also, and don't know why you keep, quoting 'Musalman',and trying to disprove his points, since you keep argung with me.

Also, I read Moiz Amjads points about his replies to your questions, I was waiting for his reply to my questions, which undoubtedly you must have emailed to him.

Also, when the moderator cut out my reply, i posted it agin with reply.
Why don't you address that:
That your criteria of something being definite in fact makes you desbelieve in Prayer, Fasting, Zakah and a whole host of other obligations, so my questions were

if you do pray, is it for exercise ?
Or fast since you like being hungry ?

Surely you can't believe, they are obligations, can you ?

Hence, what kind of Islam have you got left ?
You are so frantically trying to prove that Khilafah is not Fard, even after so many evidences-on the basis of what- Moiz Amjad????

I'm not seeking the truth !!!!!!!!
Read the post again!!!!

You started off denying, denying, denying, until you ended up with: not even saying that you believe that Prayer is Fard !
How can you ? unless you contradict your whole basis ?
How about Fasting, or Zakah, or Hajj, or Looking after your parents ? What Fards do you exactly believe in ? Any ? Really ? So whats their "categorical evidence" ?
**
Mr. PartyPooper Fear Allah!
His punishment is severe ! **

[This message has been edited by abdul_kareem (edited December 07, 2000).]

71

Jalal, I thought you could not top yourself. You just did.

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

Why do I get the feeling you don’t like me?

They shoot partypoopers, don’t they?

[This message has been edited by Mr Partypooper (edited December 07, 2000).]

72

[quote]

I'm not seeking the truth !!!!!!!!
Read the post again!!!!

[/quote]

The first statement means "I'm not seeking the truth...Yeah Right...Look whos talking!!"

I guess you should have realised that..but then again, so should you realise many other things..like...

[quote]
**

You started off denying, denying, denying, until you ended up with: not even saying that you believe that Prayer is Fard !
How can you ? unless you contradict your whole basis ?
How about Fasting, or Zakah, or Hajj, or Looking after your parents ? What Fards do you exactly believe in ? Any ? Really ? So whats their "categorical evidence" ?

**
[/quote]

But you are just going to avoid this aren't you ? By the way, Pray Jumma today ? Why ? Is it Fard ?-you don't believe so do you ? or do you?...on what basis ?

73

Hey guys Im sorry if Im intruding but, please whats the need to fight over such a thing of low importance.

Allah knows best whether it is fard or not, as far as we are concerned we all understand that ALlah is telling us that it is necessary and is in our own best interest...so lets work towards it.

I'm not implying that the Hizb-u-Tahrir are right...Allah knows best. But from where I stand I see that da'waa is currently more important than restoring the khilifa. I'm sure that more than 50% of the Muslim population would not like Islamic laws being inforced until they are educated.

74

Jalal, my comments still stand.

Cooldude and blackzero have understood my question. Why haven’t you?

Prince_x, you are most welcome to intrude whenever you like.

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

I appreciate your comments and understand that your opinion is somewhat different to mine. That is not a problem at all. So you are welcome any time.

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

As you can see, I don’t appreciate it when somebody turns the issue into a personal vendetta against me. What’s the point of becoming emotional? As a result, I find it extremely difficult to have a seriously constructive dialogue with any such person. In any case, I have forwarded my points. So in my view, this case is closed. If they so wish, I would welcome people to judge for themselves.

Thank you kindly.

They shoot partypoopers, don’t they?

75

Who are Hizb-u-Tahrir and how did they enter in our current dialog? I have read brother Moiz’s reply but I have to disagree with some of his understanding on the subject. Inshallah as time permits I will point it out.

76

Jalal is a member of this group.

For your information:
http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.org/english/culture/11.htm

They shoot partypoopers, don’t they?

77

Or is it that 'Jalal' carries these opinions, since they are Islamic. Like all the Muslim SCHOLARS.

Stop diverting PartyPooper:
Again, let me remind you of my questions:

[quote]

**
You started off denying, denying, denying, until you ended up with: not even saying that you believe that Prayer is Fard !
How can you ? unless you contradict your whole basis ?
How about Fasting, or Zakah, or Hajj, or Looking after your parents ? What Fards do you exactly believe in ? Any ? Really ? So whats their "categorical evidence" ?

But you are just going to avoid this aren't you ? By the way, Pray Jumma today ? Why ? Is it Fard ?-you don't believe so do you ? or do you?...on what basis ?

**
[/quote]

78

Dear Jalal, you have misunderstood my question. If you recall, this question was cited to be correct by the cholar in the very first post in this thread. For your convenience, he said:

*Please take a look at your question once again. You had, correctly, asked:

...give me one commandment from the Qur'an itself where it states categorically and unambiguously that to establish the Khilafah is fard on the Muslims.*

There was never any other implication as you have seemingly made out to be. The reason why you attacked the question is because you did not understand the use of the word fard. Something is fard if it is made obligatory upon Muslims. That is, it has been imposed, established and enjoined by Allah (SWT). It is where He has commanded you to do these things. So how does the issue of whether the Qur'an saying that prayer is not fard arise? Who told you that? Cooldude and Blackzero understood this straightaway. Why did you not?

One thing I don't understand is why you did not raise this issue earlier. After providing all your evidences then you chose to raise this issue. Why are you wastiing your time and mine?

Maybe you saw that they were not a good basis for your belief because it was pointed out to you that you didn't understand the meaning of Khilafah.

There are 112 verses in the Qur'an which involve prayer. And after checking the correct context of these verses, you will notice the vast majority of them testify to the fact that prayer is fard. For example, look at a few of these beautiful gems:

*
Say: "My Lord hath commanded justice; and that ye set your whole selves (to Him) at every time and place of prayer, and call upon Him, making your devotion sincere as in His sight: such as He created you in the beginning, so shall ye return."
(7:29)

And strive in His cause as ye ought to strive, (with sincerity and under discipline). He has chosen you, and has imposed no difficulties on you in religion; it is the cult of your father Abraham. It is He Who has named you Muslims, both before and in this (Revelation); that the Apostle may be a witness for you, and ye be witnesses for mankind! So establish regular Prayer, give regular Charity, and hold fast to God! He is your Protector - the Best to protect and the Best to help! (22:78)

And they have been commanded no more than this: To worship God, offering Him sincere devotion, being true (in faith); to establish regular prayer; and to practise regular charity; and that is the Religion Right and Straight.
(98:5)

"Verily, I am God: There is no god but I: So serve thou Me (only), and establish regular prayer for celebrating My praise.
(20:14)

Establish regular prayers - at the sun's decline till the darkness of the night, and the morning prayer and reading: for the prayer and reading in the morning carry their testimony.
(17:78)

And establish regular prayers at the two ends of the day and at the approaches of the night: For those things, that are good remove those that are evil: Be that the word of remembrance to those who remember (their Lord):
(11:114)

Guard strictly your (habit of) prayers, especially the Middle Prayer; and stand before God in a devout (frame of mind).
(2:238)

Enjoin prayer on thy people, and be constant therein. We ask thee not to provide sustenance: We provide it for thee. But the (fruit of) the Hereafter is for righteousness.
(20:132)

The mosques of God shall be visited and maintained by such as believe in God and the Last Day, establish regular prayers, and practise regular charity, and fear none (at all) except God. It is they who are expected to be on true guidance.
(9:18)

When ye pass (Congregational) prayers, celebrate God's praises, standing, sitting down, or lying down on your sides; but when ye are free from danger, set up Regular Prayers: For such prayers are enjoined on believers at stated times.
(4:103)

It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces Towards east or West; but it is righteousness- to believe in God and the Last Day, and the Angels, and the Book, and the Messengers; to spend of your substance, out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer, for those who ask, and for the ransom of slaves; to be steadfast in prayer, and practice regular charity; to fulfil the contracts which ye have made; and to be firm and patient, in pain (or suffering) and adversity, and throughout all periods of panic. Such are the people of truth, the God-fearing.
(2:177)*

As for Friday prayers:

O ye who believe! When the call is proclaimed to prayer on Friday (the Day of Assembly), hasten earnestly to the Remembrance of God, and leave off business (and traffic): That is best for you if ye but knew!

And when the Prayer is finished, then may ye disperse through the land, and seek of the Bounty of God: and celebrate the Praises of God often (and without stint): that ye may prosper.
(62:9-10)

Similarly, the concept of whether Khilafah is fard has to be derived in a similar way.

You claim that Islam says to establish Khilafah is fard. It has been shown to you that this opinion is not supported by any apropriate evidences.

Do you know what it says in Surah An-Nahl?

*But say not - for any false thing that your tongues may put forth,- "This is lawful, and this is forbidden," so as to ascribe false things to God. For those who ascribe false things to God, will never prosper.
(16:116)

(In such falsehood) is but a paltry profit; but they will have a most grievous Penalty.
(16:117)

To the Jews We prohibited such things as We have mentioned to thee before: We did them no wrong, but they were used to doing wrong to themselves.
(16:118)

But verily thy Lord,- to those who do wrong in ignorance, but who thereafter repent and make amends,- thy Lord, after all this, is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
(16:119)*

This is why Moiz Amjad says that:

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.

So it is not within your or Hizb-ut-Tahrir's jurisdiction to say that Khilafah is fard. Because it is not. Allah (SWT) has never said it so. Are you saying that he was wrong? Are you saying that he should have done so? Astaghfirullah! Do you know how wrong that is? Astaghfirullah! Jalal, you really make me angry. That is why I'm not going to waste my time on you any longer after I'm finished here.

So know we all know that to establish a universal Muslim state is not fard upon the Muslims. So what is?

We go a few verses later in Surah An-Nahl, and we find yet another gem, given the correct contxt:

*
Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance.
(16:125)

And if ye do catch them out, catch them out no worse than they catch you out: But if ye show patience, that is indeed the best (course) for those who are patient.
(16:126)*

It says invite all to the way of Allah (SWT)... not Khilafah! This is an order from Allah (SWT) for us to invite non-Muslims to the way of the truth. So why do I not see you in my university helping the Islamic Society to do this? Is such an activity beneath you? Are you too important and puffed to deal with such low people like us in the Islamic Society to help non-Muslims around us?

Astaghfirullah!

Shall we commence with some personal insults now? It is an option that you seem to prefer.

[quote]
Originally posted by abdul_kareem:
**
i myself, am not brilliant at reading Arabic, hence, I have English books. The texts that have been quoted, have been quoted by numerous books I have read in English and not neccesarily these specific books, hence I can only provide you with the references that these other books gave and i subsequently wrote down.

...

Also, I doubt that the above references would be of any use to Moiz Amjad, since he doesn't mind contradicting all the scholars and definite text, as Brother Jalal pointed out above.

**
[/quote]

So your Arabic is not good. Is that why you do not understand the definition of Khilafah? And your attack on Moiz Amajad... is that the best you can do?

Jalal, I know you do not like me personally. So why do you allow that personal hatred to cloud your mind and to not lead you to the truth?

[quote]
Originally posted by abdul_kareem:
*Or is it that 'Jalal' carries these opinions, since they are Islamic. Like all the Muslim SCHOLARS.
*
[/quote]

Praising yourself again Jalal, eh? Tsk, Tsk. It's not working!

By the way, there is no need to get personal. I just happen to believe that your opinion is not supported by the evidences. And that it is not endorsed by the classical juristic scholars that you have cited. All your quotes are irrelevant because it has been demonstrated to you that they mean something else entirely. So don't waste my time. If you want to hurl personal insults at me, an option that you seem to prefer, then let me give you some advice I gave earlier.

If you plan to engage in character assassination, it pays to do some homework. With modern technology, it's quite easy. All I had to do was type in "jalal-ud-deen" and click the mouse to get all kinds of interesting information, from stories about the unrelenting efforts of jalal to give Mohammed Ali Jinnah a central role as a "fasik" and traitor to Pakistan - to the fact that jalal insults other people personally who question the credibility of the Hizb-ut-Tahrir cult - to the fact that it is obvious that you use multiple nicks all the time. Might I suggest that jalal type in "Moiz Amjad" or "Mr Partypooper" and see what he gets? He might be surprised.

So why do you waste my time?

I've had enough of this.

Strictly speaking, your credibilty is under threat because you consistently seem to not tell the truth. Basically... you lie. For example, with your multiple nicks. So why should I engage in a dialogue with you?

That's it. I'm out. Don't bother replying. You have wasted too much of my time with yourself.

Do you understand?

Do not waste my time.

They shoot partypoopers, don't they?

[This message has been edited by Mr Partypooper (edited December 11, 2000).]

79

Brothers,
An overwhelming majority of both Classical and Contemporary scholars of Islam have interpreted that ALLAH (SWT) has made it fard upon Muslims to Establish the Khilafah. Brother Moiz being Anti Khilafah holds a minority opinion and is interpreting the Quran and Sunnah differently from majority opinion of the great scholars of Islam in regards to the subject. Why?

[This message has been edited by Musalman (edited December 10, 2000).]

80

Brother Musalman, PartyPooper, just can't take being wrong, what it comes down to is a simple fact:

Some Kuffar will never accept Islam...it just can't be done....even after decisive evidences, about Allah(swt) existence, and the decisive proof that the Qur'an is the word of Allah(swt), they will not accept. We should remember that even the Prophet(saw) was not able to make his uncle into a Muslim, in the same way, some people will reject things and keep on rejecting them...

Allow me to show that this anology is true by reproducing the evidences that I(or AK) have used:

[quote]

**
EVIDENCES FOR ESTABLISHING THE KHILAFAH ARE CONCLUSIVE IN MEANING.**
**
"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]

The evidence that the appointment of a Khaleefah is obligatory upon all Muslims is in the Sunnah and the Ijma‘a (consensus) of the Sahabah. 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.

Hisham ibn ‘Urwa reported on the authority of Abu Saleh on the authority of Abu Hurairah that the Prophet (saw) said:** “Leaders will take charge of you after me, where the pious (one) will lead you with his piety and the impious (one) with his impiety, so listen to them and obey them in everything which conforms with the truth. If they act rightly it is for your credit, and if they acted wrongly it is counted for you and against them.”** Muslim narrated on the authority of al-A’araj, on the authority of Abu Hurairah, that the Prophet (saw) said: “Behold, the Imam is but a shield from behind whom the people fight and by whom they protect themselves.” Muslim reported on the authority of Abu Hazim, who said: *“I accompanied Abu Hurairah for five years and heard him talking of the Prophet’s saying: The Prophets ruled over the children of Israel, whenever a Prophet died another Prophet succeeded him, but there will be no Prophet after me. There will be Khulafa’a and they will number many. They asked: What then do you order us? He said: Fulfil the bay‘ah to them one after the other and give them their due. Surely Allah will ask them about what He entrusted them with.” **Ibn ‘Abbas narrated that the Prophet (saw) said: *“If anyone sees in his amir something that displeases him let him remain patient, for behold, he who separates himself from the sultan (authority of Islam) by even so much as a hand span and dies thereupon, has died a death of the days of jahilliyah”. **

In these ahadith, the Prophet (saw) informs us that leaders will run the affairs of Muslims, and the ahadith include the description of the Khaleefah as a shield, i.e. a protection. So the description of the Imam as a shield is informative of the benefits of the presence of the Imam, thus it is a command for action, because if the information conveyed by Allah (swt) and the Prophet (saw) contained rebuke then it is a command of prohibition, and if it contained praise then it is a command for action. If the ordered action is necessary to implement a hukm shari‘i (divine law), or by its negligence a hukm shari‘i will be neglected, then this command is decisive. In these ahadith there is information also that those who run the affairs of Muslims are Khulafa’a, which indicates an order to appoint them. They also include a prohibition for Muslims to separate from the authority, which indicates the obligation upon Muslims to appoint an authority for themselves, i.e. ruling. Moreover, the Prophet (saw) ordered the Muslims to obey the Khaleefah and to fight those who dispute his authority as Khaleefah, which indicates an order to appoint a Khaleefah and to protect his Khilafah by fighting against whosoever disputes with him. Muslim reported that the Prophet (saw) said: **“He who pledged allegiance to an Imam giving him the clasp of his hand and the fruit of his heart shall obey him as long as he can, and if another comes to dispute with him you have to strike the neck of that man.” **So the command to obey the Imam is an order to establish him, and the command to fight those who dispute with him is an evidence that this command is decisive in maintaining the presence of one 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.

However, the establishment of Islam and the implementation of the Shari‘ah rules in all walks of life is compulsory on Muslims through definitely proven evidences. This duty cannot be achieved unless there is a ruler who has an authority. The divine principle states** ‘what is necessary to accomplish a wajib (duty) is itself a wajib’. **So the establishment of a Khaleefah is also compulsory according to this divine principle.

Moreover, Allah (swt) has ordered the Prophet (saw) to rule between Muslims by that which He (swt) revealed to him, and the order of Allah (swt) to him was in a decisive manner. Allah (swt) addressed the Prophet (saw) saying:
**
“And rule between them by that which Allah revealed to you, and do not follow their vain desires away from the truth which came to you”. [TMQ 5:48] **

And He (swt) said:
**
“And rule between them by that which Allah revealed to you and do not follow their whims, and beware (be on the alert) that they may deviate you away from even some part of what Allah revealed to you”. [TMQ 5:49]
**
The speech of Allah (swt) to the Prophet (saw) is a speech to his Ummah unless there is an evidence which limits the speech to him. In this case there is no such evidence, so the aforementioned verses order all Muslims to establish the rule. The establishment of the Khaleefah does not mean other than the establishment of the rule and the authority. On the other hand, Allah (swt) made it obligatory upon Muslims to obey those in authority, i.e. the ruler, which indicates that the existence of the ruler is obligatory upon Muslims. Allah (swt) said:
**
“O you who believe obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority amongst you”. [TMQ 4:59]
**
Allah (swt) does not order obedience to those who do not exist. This indicates that the existence of the ruler is obligatory. When Allah (swt) orders obedience to those in authority it is an order to establish them. The implementation of the Shari‘ah depends upon the existence of the ruler, thus, the establishment of the ruler becomes obligatory as its absence will result in the sin of neglecting the Shari‘ah.

Therefore, it is clear from these evidences that the establishment of the rule and the authority amongst Muslims is fard, and it is also clear that the appointment of a Khaleefah who takes the charge of the rule and the authority is compulsory upon Muslims in order to implement the Shari‘ah laws; and not for the sake of rule and authority only. The Prophet (saw) said: “The best of your Imams (leaders) are those whom you love and they love you, who pray for you and you pray for them; and the worst of your Imams are those whom you hate and they hate you and you curse them and they curse you.” The Messenger of Allah (saw) was asked: “Would we not declare war on them (face them with the swords)?” He said: “No, as long as they establish salah (meaning Islam) among you.” This hadith is clear in informing about the good and bad leaders, and clear in prohibiting the challenge of their authority as long as they establish the prayer, which in this context indicates upholding of Islam, and establishing its rule.
So the obligation upon Muslims to appoint the Khaleefah who establishes the laws of Islam and conveys its call is a matter which has no doubt with regard to its certainty in the sound texts of Shari‘ah. Moreover, it is an obligatory duty due to the fact that Allah (swt) made it fard upon Muslims to establish the authority of Islam and to protect the honour of Muslims. However, this duty is a collective one, so if some people of the Ummah accomplished it, the fard is fulfilled and thus responsibility drops from the rest of the Ummah. And if part of the Ummah was unable to achieve the fard, though they carried out the actions which establish it, then the responsibility remains upon all the Muslims, and the fard remains upon every Muslim as long as Muslims are without a Khaleefah.

To refrain from establishing a Khaleefah for the Muslims is a great sin because it is abstaining from carrying out a very important fard of Islam, upon which the implementation of the divine laws depends, even upon which the presence of Islam in the battlefield of life depends as well. So Muslims as a whole commit a great sin by refraining from establishing a Khaleefah for all Muslims. And if they agreed to remain without a Khaleefah the sin would befall all Muslims in the entire world. If some of the Muslims embarked on working to establish a Khaleefah and the others did not, the sin will drop from the shoulders of those who started to work to establish the Khaleefah, while the fard remains on them until the Khaleefah is appointed. This is so because the involvement in establishing the fard removes the sin for the delay of its fulfilment in its time, and for its non-fulfilment despite one’s engagement in the work for establishing it, and despite his hatred of that which prevents him from accomplishing it.

As for those who were not engaged in the work for establishing the fard, the sin will remain on them as soon as the three days period has passed, from the departure of the Khaleefah until the appointment of a new Khaleefah, because Allah (swt) has entrusted them with a fard, which they did not carry out nor engage themselves in the work which is required for its completion. Therefore, they are sinful and deserve the punishment and shame from Allah (swt) in this life and the hereafter. They are sinful due to their refrain from establishing the Khaleefah or from the actions which (according to Shari‘ah) establish the Khaleefah. It is clear and obvious that a Muslim deserves the punishment of Allah (swt) when he ignores any of the duties enjoined upon him, particularly the duty by which the other duties are implemented and the Shari‘ah rules are established and the matter of Islam is brought aloft and the word of Allah (swt) is exalted in the Muslim and the rest of the world.

Accordingly, no Muslim on the face of this earth has an excuse to abandon the duty of establishing the deen which Allah (swt) has ordered, that is, the establishment of a Khaleefah for Muslims, when there is no Khilafah on the earth, and no one to implement the hudood (limits) of Allah (swt) to protect the sanctities of Allah (swt), and no one to implement the laws of the deen and unify the Muslim community under the banner of La ilaha illa Allah, Muhammad ur-Rasul Allah. There is no permission in Islam to abandon the work for this duty until it is indeed completed.

**Imam Ali(ra) a well known sahabi, the forth caliph, and a very good scholar said in his book Nahj-ul-Balagha(part1 page 91):
"People must have an amir, either just, or a tyrant(not tyrants of today) where the believer works under his Imara(rule) and under which the unbeliever would also benefit, until his rule ended by the end of his life(ajal), the booty would be gathered, the nemey would be fought, th routes would be mae safe, the strong one will return what he took from the weak till the tyrant would be contained, and would not bother anyone."

Al-Imam Al-Mawardi in his book Al-Ahkam AL Sultaniyah, page 9 states : "It is forbidden for the Ummah to have two Imam at the same time".

Al-Imam Al Joziri in his book Al-Fiqh alal-Mathahib Al-Arba'a(the fiqh of the four schools of thought), volume 5 page 16, says:
"The Imams of the four schools of thought-may Allah be pleased with them, agree that the Imama(Khilafah) is an obligation, and that the Muslims appoint an Imam who would implement the deen's rites, and give the opressed justice against the opressors. It is forbidden for Muslims to have two Imams in the world whether in agreement or in discord"
**

As well as the above, there are also numerous evidences which obligate the muslims to remove the non-Islamic authority above them and replace it with an Islamic authority, ie the establishment of a state that rules fully by Islam ie the Khilafah

**
Bukhari and Muslim narrated that Abu Bakr (ra) had said in one of his speeches: "And it is not lawful for the muslims to have two rulers. Whatever the reason is, their affair and laws will then differ, and their unity will be broken, and they shall dispute with each other. Then the sunnah will be abolished, and the innovation will appear, and the fitna will be severe". May allah be pleased with him.

Tirmizi narrated on the authority of Tariq Ibn Shihab that he said: The first one who made the khutbah before the salat (on the day of eid) is Marwan (the goveroner). A man stood to him and said: "You opposed the sunnah". He said "O man what was before can be left". Abu Saeed (the companion of the messenger saw) said: "this person had done his duty. I heared the messenger of Allah (saw) saying "The one who sees a Munkar should deny it by his hand. If he can not, then by his tongue. If he can not then by his heart and this is the lowest of Iman". In another vesion of the hadith, the man pulled the goveroner on the ground from his clothes.

Muslim narrated on the authority of Umm Salamah (ra) that the messenger (saw) said " There will be leaders upon you that you will know and deny (their evil). The one who hates (their evil) shall be innocent, and the one who who denies shall be safe (from punishment), but the one who is pleased and follows (them, he will be punished).

'Ubada ibn as-Samit said, "We took an oath on the Messenger of Allah that we would obey him and listen to him in the time of ease or hardship and we would not dispute the authority from those who have the right to it and that we would stand or say the truth wherever we were, not fearing the blame of anybody for the sake of Allah."

Ibn Majjah on the authority of Abu Saeed, Ahmad and Ibn Majjah and Tabarani and Baihaqi on the authority of Abu Umamah, Ahmad and Nisa'i on the authority of the tabie Tariq Ibn Shihab all narrated that the messenger (saw) said : "The best of Jihad is a word of truth in the face of a tyrant ruler".

Ma'qil bin Yasar, may Allah be pleased with him, reported: Verily I have heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Anyone amongst the slaves (of Allah) who was entrusted with the affairs of his subjects and he died in such a state that he was dishonest in his dealings with those over whom he ruled, Paradise would be forbidden for him. [Bukhari complied it the book of Legal Judgements no 6617,6618]
AbdulRazzaq and Imam Ahmad both narrated on the authority of Ibn Masood (ra) that the messenger (saw) said to him: "What will you do O Abu AbdulRahman (Ibn Massood) if you had rulers who abolished the sunnah and delayed the prayer from its time?". Ibn Masoood said: What do you order me o messenger of Allah?. The messenger said: "Ibn Umm Abd (Ibn Masood) is asking me what will he do!!!There is no obedience to the creature by disobeying the creator".

Ahmad, Ibn Majah and Al-Hakim narrated on the authority of Abu Saeed that the messemger (saw) said: "Any one from your goveroners orders you to do a disobedience to Allah, then do not obey him". [Imam Suyooti: Saheeh]

Ahmad narrated on the authority of Anas (ra) that the messenger (saw) said:"There is no obedience to the one who disobeyed Allah" [Imam Suyooti: Hasan]

Al-Bazzar and Tabarani narrated on the authority of Abu Hurayrah that the messenger (saw) said: "You shall enjoin good and you shall forbid munkar, or Allah will empower on you the evil ones, then your best ones will call upon Allah and he shall not respond".

Bukhari and Muslim narrated on the authority of Aisha (ra) that the messenger (saw) said: "O people ! Allah says: Enjoin good and forbid evil before you call me and I will not reply to you, and before you ask me and I will not give you, and before you seek my forgivenss and I will not give victory to you".

Al-Tabarani narrated on the authority of Anas that the messenger (saw) said: "Enjoin the good even if you did not do the good (all the good) and forbid evil even if you did not refrain from all the evil". [Imam Suyooti: hasan]

The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “By Him in Whose hand is my soul, you must order what is right and forbid what is evil, otherwise Allah will be about to send His punishment upon you. And then if you pray to Him (to ask Him), He would not answer you.”

Al-Harth narrated on the authority of Ibn Masood that the messenger (saw) said: "For every matter, there is a thing that spoils it, and what spoils this deen is the evil rulers".[Imam Suyooti : Saheeh]

Al-Bazzar narrated on the authority of Muadh(ra), that the messenger (saw) said: "the most evil ones in my ummah are the evil scholars among the people".[Imam Suyooti: Hasan]

Imam Ahmad, Tabarani, Al-Hakim and Al-Baihaqi narrated on the authority of Abdullah Ibn Amr that the messenger (saw) said "If you see my Ummah afraid of telling the oppressor: You are oppressor, it is farewell to the ummah". [Imam Suyooti : Saheeh]

On the authority of Ibn Masood (ra), he said "one of the greatest sins is that the man says to his brother "fear Allah", so he says "be concerned about yourself, are you ordering me". [Narrated by Tabarani, and its men are Saheeh]

On the authority of Ibn Masood (ra), he said "it is enough sin for the person that if it is said to him: fear allah, he becomes angry".[Narrated by Tabarani, and the men in the chain are Saheeh].

Ibn Majjah narrated on the authority of Abu Saeed that the messenger (saw) said: "Let not one of you scorn himself". They said : O messenger of Allah, how one of us will scorn himself?. He (saw) said: "He sees a person whom Allah blamed, then he does not say about him what Allah has said about him. Allah (swt) will say to him: What prevented you from saying about this person so and so? He says: the fear from people. Allah says : Come, come to me, I am the one deserved to be feared"

Bukhari and Muslim narrated on the authority of Abu saeed (ra) that the messenger (saw) said: "Let not the fear of people prevent one of you to utter the truth when he sees it (i.e. sees the munkar) or hears it".

Al-Nasaii and Ibn Majah narrated on the authority of Abu Hurayra(ra) that the messenger (saw) said: Hadd (one penality from the Imam) which is implemented on the earth is better for the people of the earth than to be rained for forty morning". [Imam Suyooti: Saheeh]

On the authority of Abu Musa(ra), the messenger of Allah (saw) said: "In the hellfire there is a valley, and in this valley there is a well called "Habahab", it is duty upon Allah to reside in this well every stubborn oppressor (ruler)".[Narated by Tabarani and its Isnad is Hasan]

Al-Hakim narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas the messenger (saw) said: "The one who helps an oppressor to remove by the falsehood of this oppressor a truth, Allah and his messenger are innocent from him". [Imam Suyooti: Saheeh]

Imam Tabarani narrated on the authority of Anas (ra) that a man asked "will Allah cause the earth to swallow in a land where there are muslims in it?". The messenger (saw) said: "yes, if the people increased their evil too much".[its chain is Saheeh according to Majma' Al-Zawaid written by Al-Hafiz Al-Haithami]

Any leader of a ten men or more, he will be brought in the judgment day chained until either the justice will unchain him or the oppression will chain him". [Narrated by Al-Bazzar, and the men in the chain are Saheeh]

1092 On the authority of Abu Musa (ra), the messenger (saw) said "People of Mu'roof in the donya (those who enjoin good) are people of Muroof in the Akhira, and people of Munkar in the donya are people of the Munkar in the Akhira". [Narrated by Tabarani. Al-Hafiz Al-Haithami said the people in the chain are trustworthy, and there are some words about some of the narrators that do not harm].

On the authority of Abu Musa (ra), the messenger (saw) said:"By whom the soul of Muhammad is in his hand, Mu'roof and Munkar are two creatures that will be stood for people in the day of Judgment: The Mu'roof will promise his people (those who enjoin good) the khair (good), but the Munkar will say : away, away, but its people can not except sticking with it". [Narratd by Ahmad and Al-Bazzar, and the men in the chain are Saheeh].

Ahmad narrated on the authority of Abu Bakrah that the messenger (saw) said: "If the people see the Munkar (evil, wrong doing) and they do not change it, Allah will take them with a punishment".

Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawood and Al-Nasii narrated on the authority of Ali (ra) that the messenger (saw) said: "There is no obedience to any one by disobeying Allah; the obedience is only in the Mu'roof".

Al-Hakinm narrated on the authority of Jabir that the messenger (saw) said "The one who pleases the ruler by what causes the anger of Allah, he goes out from the neck of the deen of Allah". [Imam Suyooti: Hasan]

Ahmad and Tabarani narrated on the authority of Udai Ibn Umairah that the messenger (saw) said: "Allah will not punish the majority by the doing of the minority unless the majority are able to change on the minority. If then the majority did not change on the minority, Allah will punish both the majority and the minority".

Al-Zawaid: Al-Tabarani narrated that the messenger of Allah (saw) said "Allah will not punish the majority by the doing of the minority until the minority does a deed in which the majority could deny and they do not deny, then Allah will permit the destruction of the majority and the minority".[trustworthy chain according to Majma]

Al-Dailami narrated on the authority of Abu Hurayrah that the messenger (saw) said: "If you see the scholar is mixing with the ruler too much, then know he is a theif". [Imam Suyooti : Hasan]

Bukhari and Muslim narrated on the authority of Abu Bakr (ra) that the messenger (saw) said :" Any people in which there are sins done among them, they can change the evil and they do not change, Allah will cover them with a punishment from him".

Al-Tabarani and Al-Baihaqi narrated on the authority of Abu Bakrah that the messenger (saw) said: "The sultan (caliph/ruler who applies islam) is the shadow of Allah on earth".[Imam Suyooti: Saheeh].

Tirmizi narrated that Abu Bakr As-siddeeq (ra) said : "O people! You read this ayat (O who you believe ! Take care of your ownselves. If you follow guidnace of Allah, then no hurt will come to you)[Maida, verse 105] And I heared the messenger of Allah (saw) saying:"If people see the oppressor, and they do not take on his hand (prevent him and admonish him)Allah will cover them with a punishment".

Ibn Saad narrated in a chain of truthful men on the authority of Saeed Ibn Al-Musaib that Omar used to say: "the people will stay straight as long as their imams (leaders) and guides stay straight".

"The best of your Imams (leaders) are those whom you love and they love you, who pray for you and you pray for them; and the worst of your Imams are those whom you hate and they hate you and you curse them and they curse you." The Messenger of Allah was asked: "Would we not declare war on them (face them with the swords)?" He said: "No, as long as they establish salat (meaning Islam) among you."

Abu Ya'la (d. 458 AH) a leading Hanbali scholar along with Ibn Taymiyyah, resembled Mawardi(d. 450AH) in his thought about the Khilafah. Abu Ya'la quotes Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal that the Muslims would be in a state of Fitnah if there was no Khaleef. Page 125, Mahmood A. Ghazi's Book 'Political and Constitutional Thought of Islam'
Qadi Abd al Jabbar (d. 415 AH,1025AD)
He wrote extensively on the subject, some of his works include:

Sharh al-Usul al Khamsah
Al-Mughni fi Abwab al-Tawhid Wa'l Adl

The establishment of the Khilafah according to the Qadi in compulsory upon the Ummah, because many of the obligations of Islam cannot be fulfilled without the Khilafah, stating the well known principle:
Ma la Yatimmu'l Wajib Illa Bihi Fahuwa Wajib [Whatever leads to Wajib is also a Wajib]

He also discusses the concept of Imamah in the context the Quranic principle of Amr bi'l Maruf wa'l Nahy An al-Munkar[Enjoining of the Good and the Forbidding of the Evil]. After extensively quoting from the Qur'an and the Hadith he establishes that the Enjoining of the Good and the Forbidding of the Evil is incumbent(Fard) on the believers. Then he says that individual Muslims cannot meet the full requirements of the principle of Amr bi'l Maruf wa'l Nahy An al-Munkar because it cannot be established without the State.

Sharh al-Usul al-Khamsah p.759
Sharh al-Usul al-Khamsah p.749
Sharh al-Usul al-Khamsah p.750
Sharh al-Usul al-Khamsah p.751

Abd al Qahir baghdadi
Abu mansur Abd al-Qahir ibn Tahir al-Shafi was among the among the most noted theologians of the late fourth and early fifth century AH.
He taught as many as 17 sciences including Fiqh, Usul al Fiqh, Arithmetic and Fariad.

He criically examines the viewpoint of the Ahl al-Sunnah Wa'l Jamaah on the issue of the Khilafah. According to him it os obligatory upon the Ummah to establish the Khilafah, and also states that this obligation is unversally accepted by all the Muslim scholars. He also criticises Abu Bakr al Assam and Hisham al-Ghuti who are from the Mutazilites.

Al-Farq Bayn al-Firaq, p271

al-Sharastani
Abu'l Fath Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Karim al-Sharastani(479-458 AH)
According to Sharastani, the establihemnt of the Khilafah is obligatory in all situations. In no case, in no time and no situation can the Muslim Ummah be relieved of the resposibility of establishing the institution of the Khilafah according to the injunctions of Islam.

Al-Milal wa'l Nihal, Vol 1, p.109

Ibn Taymiyyah(d. 728 AH)

Ibn Taymiyyah ideas about the Khilafah can be found in:

Minhaj al_sunnah al-Nabawiyyah fi Naqd Kalam al-Shi'ah wa'l Qadariyah
Al-Siyasah al-Shari'yyah
Al-Hisbah fi'l-Islam

Ibn Taymiyyah states that the main purpose of the Prophet(saw) was to establish a social order on the basis of a universal, permanent, consistent and all-Prevailing ideology. He states that the establishment of the state is more than necessary. Ibn Taymiyyah holds the opinion that it is one of the greatest obligations of th Din.

'The aim and objective of politics is to seek nearness to Allah. A Muslim adopts politics only to establish the Din which guarantees such a nearness by providing a suitable psychological and spiritual climate in which man achieves a spiritual perfection and, hence, the Divine Nearness. That is why a political activity divorced from the guidance of the Din is a curse for humanity and entails all sorts of evils and immoralities.'

Al Siyasa al-Shariyyah

Ibn Qayyum also held the same opinion as Ibn Taymiyyah:

al-Turuq al_Hukmiyyah Fil Siyasah al-Shariyyah
I'lam al-Muwaqqin

Badruddin Ibn Jamaah
Ibn Jamaah is noted as the Shafi jurist of the seventh century AH.
He served as a Qadi in Palestine and a teacher of Fiqh.
In his treatise 'Tahrir al-Ahkam- fi Tadbir ahl al-Islam'
he establishes the obligation of the Khilafah through the Quran.
He starts his work'Tharir al-Ahkam with the verse:

"O David: We did indeed make you a vicegerent on earth: So judge between men with truth and justice and follow not the lusts and desires: for they will mislead you from the path of Allah"

Diya al-Din Barani(683-758AH)
Diya al-Din Barani lived in India. His works mentioning the issue of the Khilafah include:
Tarikh Firoz Shahi
Fatawa-i-Kahandari

He says that 'the very creation of Man on earth is meant only for the worship of Allah(swt). And His true worship is only possible when mankind is guaranteed peaceful and secure conditions of life. To successfully discharge the divine obligations a secure and organised life in order and well-organised that Allah created the Khilafah.'

Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Musa al-Shatibi(d. 790 AH)
One of the greates jurustic minds in the history of Islam.
A Maliki jurist je was one of the most outstanding Faqih of the eighth century AH.
He says tha the Khilafah is an obligation and further states 'in the absense of the khilafah, a state of anarchy and lawlessness would prevail and this would usher in a great corruption and disorder. And it is evudent, that the establishment of the Din is quite impossible in a state of anarchy and disorder.'

Kitab al-Din

Abu Zayd Wali al-Din Abd al_rahman Ibn Khaldun (732-808 AH)

Ibn Khaldun taught in Al-Azhar, was a scholar of the Maliki Jurisprudence and also worked as a judge in Cairo.

He states 'the best kind of state is the Khilfah, which is a system based on the Shariah.This is the only system based on the Shariah. This is the only system which guarantees the fulfilment of all natural and genuine human needs bothe in this world and in the hereafter. It also guarantees full equality between the ruler and the ruled. The Khilfah is the divine method of politics. Initially it is established by the Prophets and Apostles og God and then run by their successors - the Khulufa. This is the system which has been laid down by God the Almighty Himself, and, hence, no ther system can be at par with it.'

Shah Waiy Allah

According to Shah Waliy Allah, it is a colletive obligtaion (Fard Al-Kifaya) upon the Muslims for all times to come to elect and install a Khilafah. To support this Shah Waliy Allah give various arguments:

'the collective reason of mankind requires that a Khilafah should be there to lookafter the iterests which cannot be acheived without a Khilafah.
The Khilafah is appointed for achieving two categories og objective and puuposes. The Holy Prophet(saw) was also sent to achive these two calsses of objectives. Therefore after passing away of the Prophet, a Khilafah is needed to succeed him and to implement his orders and commandmants. That is why the obediance to the imam id equal to the obediance to the Prophet and the disobediance of the Khaleef amount to disobediance of the Prophet:

"Whosoever obeys an Amir, verily he has obeyed me; and whosoever disobeyed the Amir he disobeyed me."[hadith]

"the Imam is a sheild from the back of which the muslims fight and protect themselves. if the Imam commands to fearAllah and guides his will be a big Reward, if he orders other than this he will bear the burden of it."[hadith]

In Izaalat al-KhafaShah Waliy Allah quotes another hadith which he says in CLEAR TEXTUAL evidence (An-Nass in proving that the establishment of the Khilafah is an obligation:
"Whosoever dies without a bayah on his neck dies the death of Jahiliyyah"

'The sahaba also rushed to establish the khilafah immediately, after the death of the prophet(saw) and delayed his burial. Moreover there are matters which cannot be accomplished without the Khilafah: the Jihad, the administration of Justice, the revival of Islamic science, the establishment of the pillars of Islam, the defence of Dar al-Islam and such other things that have been collectively enjoined upon the Muslim Ummah.'

Hujjat Allah al-Balighah Vol 1
Hujjat Allah al-Balighah Vol 2
Izalat al-Khafa, Vol 1
Izalat al-Khafa, Vol 2

**

[/quote]

[This message has been edited by jalal_ud_deen (edited December 11, 2000).]