I will answer what sayyidna umar b khattab said about this issue
"someone better than me ( abu bakr) choose a successor and someone better than him ( Rasoolallah) did not.So thats why I will not choose a successor".
AT any rate give me a leader that enforces shariah in all spheres of life ( not selectively like mr zia and his disastrous foreign policy of backing afghan bandits) and I will be happy no matter how he gets into power
About the saying of the Umar- what a foresight Abu Bakr was blessed with that he felt the importance of nominating a successor whereas the Prophet of Allah didnot! And, to this day there remains confusion and division about this issue. Full marks to the first caliph.
Jinnah was remarkable leader no doubt , and had many fine qualities but we are under no obligation to follow his example.
So do u follow sunnah of Muhammad (saw) or Jinnah ?
So what exactly is the 'real' Sunnah in terms of appointing a leader? Our Prophet (saww) nominated many people to important posts during his 23 years of Prophethood. How did he make appointments? Any examples from Quran as to how to choose a leader?
About the saying of the Umar- what a foresight Abu Bakr was blessed with that he felt the importance of nomiating a successor whereas the Prophet of Allah didnot and to this day there seems confusion about it. Full marks to the first caliph.
The seconed part of your post is amusingly vague.
Peace Pagluu
By the way we don't believe Abu Bakr (RA) was successor ... there is no successor to Muhammad (SAW) he is and will be the Prophet of our time until the end of days.
Abu Bakr (RA) was the first Khalifa. (translation ... caretaker) appointed by the people who were of highest calibre from the Ahl-al-Bayt.
How is that possible when every attenpt at introducing shariah is condemned as "talibanification" by secular media in pakistan.
I know media is biased but that is not the reason behind the unpopularity of Taliban. The reason is that they are hypocrities. They seem to be fighting for everything (and everybody!) but Sharia or Islam.
To me, from the Sunni world, Ikhwan ul Muslimeen from Egypt seem much more sensible and solid in their outlook.
By the way we don't believe Abu Bakr (RA) was successor ... there is no successor to Muhammad (SAW) he is and will be the Prophet of our time until the end of days.
Abu Bakr (RA) was the first Khalifa. (translation ... caretaker) appointed by the people who were of highest calibre from the Ahl-al-Bayt.
Peace upon you too brother,
Khalifa actually do mean 'successor'. The actual term is "Khalifatur Rasool Allah", i.e. successor of the Prophet of Allah.
Which people of the 'high calibre' appointed Abu Bakr exactly?
I know media is biased but that is not the reason behind the unpopularity of Taliban. The reason is that they are hypocrities. They seem to be fighting for everything (and everybody!) but Sharia or Islam.
To me, from the Sunni world, Ikhwan ul Muslimeen from Egypt seem much more sensible and solid in their outlook.
I agree that Ikhwan are a thousand times better than taliban , but as u said yourself media is biased anyone who talks about shariah is labelled a taliban
So what exactly is the 'real' Sunnah in terms of appointing a leader? Our Prophet (saww) nominated many people to important posts during his 23 years of Prophethood. How did he make appointments? Any examples from Quran as to how to choose a leader?
You just answered your own question, there is no hard and fast rule for appointing leaders from Quran or Sunnah.
prophet appointed a huge variety of people ranging from muhajireen to ansar to ex-enemies as leaders of expeditions.
But Prophet himself was the supreme leader at that time so there was no need for someone to organize the affairs of the Ummah , as it later became an issue after his death.
About the saying of the Umar- what a foresight Abu Bakr was blessed with that he felt the importance of nominating a successor whereas the Prophet of Allah didnot! And, to this day there remains confusion and division about this issue. Full marks to the first caliph.
The seconed part of your post is amusingly vague.
Its easy for you to say that now but time of sayyidna abu bakr was plagued with difficulties from Riddah wars to trouble at syrian border, to nominate someone a successor ( though not ideal) was certainly not unreasonable at the time. And umar was not related to abu bakr in anyway, nor did he want to amass a fortune under his term.Furthermore umar with his priority in islam and austere lifestyle , harshness was one of the few ideal to deal with the ummah at them time.Would Ali have made a better successor ? certainly there is ample evidence for that from none other than umar himself.
"if this bald man is made the caliph ( pointing to Ali) he will lead the ummah on the right path"
And speaking of divisions there are multiple divisions in "shiaism" today too , should we blame the imams of the ahlulbayt for that now ?
Re: Plan to restore Pakistan- Reclaiming the founding moment
[QUOTE]
And, to this day there remains confusion and division about this issue. Full marks to the first caliph.
The seconed part of your post is amusingly vague.
[/QUOTE]
nothing vague about that , in this day and age muhajireen and ansar are long gone so sabiqa or priority cannot be used as a criterea for leader selection.
So we base on other principal i.e a pious religious man who rigrously enforces shariah regardless of his backgorund and no matter how he gets to power is ideal for caliph.That is why umar b abdul aziz is called khalifa rashid despite the fact that he was not a sahabi , NOR was he elected by a shura and others who were from sahaba but didnt enforce shariah are EXCLUDED from pious caliphs. ( HINT !!! )
Jurists have also supported pious leaders who even wanted to take power by armed revolts in history, many examples for that.So as long as leader enforces shariah and lives a life in accordance with pious caliphs he should be accepted.
I agree that Ikhwan are a thousand times better than taliban , but as u said yourself media is biased anyone who talks about shariah is labelled a taliban
now I wouldn't say that everybody who talks about sharia is labelled as a Taliban. There is many learned people who do express their views and opinions about sharia and are taken very seriously and given the respect.
You just answered your own question, there is no hard and fast rule for appointing leaders from Quran or Sunnah.
prophet appointed a huge variety of people ranging from muhajireen to ansar to ex-enemies as leaders of expeditions.
But Prophet himself was the supreme leader at that time so there was no need for someone to organize the affairs of the Ummah , as it later became an issue after his death.
What was Prophet's solution for this issue? Did he present any at all or left it for the future genrations to decide for themselves?
And since in sharia, the center point is the book of Allah, what does Quran say about this issue of choosing a leader? Any verse, any examples?
Its easy for you to say that now but time of sayyidna abu bakr was plagued with difficulties from Riddah wars to trouble at syrian border, to nominate someone a successor ( though not ideal) was certainly not unreasonable at the time. And umar was not related to abu bakr in anyway, nor did he want to amass a fortune under his term.Furthermore umar with his priority in islam and austere lifestyle , harshness was one of the few ideal to deal with the ummah at them time.Would Ali have made a better successor ? certainly there is ample evidence for that from none other than umar himself.
"if this bald man is made the caliph ( pointing to Ali) he will lead the ummah on the right path"
And speaking of divisions there are multiple divisions in "shiaism" today too , should we blame the imams of the ahlulbayt for that now ?
So you think the conditions at the time of the death of the Prophet (saww) did not posses any problems? Was the internal threat of the freshly converted, arrogant Quraishi tribe leaders not present? was there no hypocrities within the ranks of the Muslims? had Muslims never disobeyed the clear commands of the Prophet and Allah, on regular basis? Was it reasonable for the Prophet to leave the nation without nominating a leader or atleast a clear method to choose one?
Umar was not related to Abu Bakr, but they were very close which is clearly evident from the role Umar played following the events that took place after the death of the Prophet (saww).
Umar also said about Imam Ali (as) "I fear he might be too pleasent and soft for the people". It was all about his opinions, nothing from the Quran or Sunnat.
The religion of Allah (swt) is perfect and complete. It is the people who make divisions.
[5:14] And from those who call themselves Christians, We took their covenant, but they have abandoned a good part of the Message that was sent to them. So We planted amongst them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection; and Allâh will inform them of what they used to do.
nothing vague about that , in this day and age muhajireen and ansar are long gone so sabiqa or priority cannot be used as a criterea for leader selection.
So we base on other principal i.e a pious religious man who rigrously enforces shariah regardless of his backgorund and no matter how he gets to power is ideal for caliph.That is why umar b abdul aziz is called khalifa rashid despite the fact that he was not a sahabi , NOR was he elected by a shura and others who were from sahaba but didnt enforce shariah are EXCLUDED from pious caliphs. ( HINT !!! )
Jurists have also supported pious leaders who even wanted to take power by armed revolts in history, many examples for that.So as long as leader enforces shariah and lives a life in accordance with pious caliphs he should be accepted.
One condition for a revolt is the support of the people. I will support in everyway, a leader who enforces sharia, and lives a life in accordance with the Sunnah and Quran (not the lives of the 'pious' caliphs).
What was Prophet's solution for this issue? Did he present any at all or left it for the future genrations to decide for themselves?
And since in sharia, the center point is the book of Allah, what does Quran say about this issue of choosing a leader? Any verse, any examples?
According to a wide range of opinion of scholars ( including nonpartisan like orientalists) Prophet did not appoint any successor
So you think the conditions at the time of the death of the Prophet (saww) did not posses any problems? Was the internal threat of the freshly converted, arrogant Quraishi tribe leaders not present? was there no hypocrities within the ranks of the Muslims? had Muslims never disobeyed the clear commands of the Prophet and Allah, on regular basis? Was it reasonable for the Prophet to leave the nation without nominating a leader or atleast a clear method to choose one?
[/QUOTE]
True but he didnt , just like umar and ali never appointed their successors ( hasan was ELECTED by unanimously by muslims of kufa & medina).
I agree with the example of Prophet, umar and ali in this regard.Abu bakr thought differently but he was wrong but to say he had malicious intentions is baseless their is no tangiable gain that abu bakr wud get in appointing umar.
Nor did umar completely follow abu bakr's policies , he did many things diffrently.
[QUOTE]
The religion of Allah (swt) is perfect and complete. It is the people who make divisions.
[5:14] And from those who call themselves Christians, We took their covenant, but they have abandoned a good part of the Message that was sent to them. So We planted amongst them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection; and Allâh will inform them of what they used to do.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
Well do u think "shiaism " is without its divisions ? Didnt it take nearly 2 centuries before the final doctrine of present day 12ers finally evolved ?
Why didnt all the shias or those who claimed to be unanimously agree on one imam after another ? if succession was so "perfect and complete"in their eyes.
[QUOTE]
One condition for a revolt is the support of the people.
[/QUOTE]
STRANGE ! how much support did the imams of ahlulbayt get when they revolted ? popular support justify rebellion then abbassids are prolly more justified than anyone else
[QUOTE]
I will support in everyway, a leader who enforces sharia, and lives a life in accordance with the Sunnah and Quran (not the lives of the 'pious' caliphs).
[/QUOTE]
okay forget the caliphs , but will u accept a shariah system that is not based on jafari fiqah ?
of what ? deen then surely sunnis will outnumber shias and will proclaim a state law based on sunni fiqah.
worldy education promotes corruption and nothing good ever comes out of it so u can forget shariah state that way
According to uncountable Shia/Sunni sources, Prophet (saww) did explicitly announce the Wilayat of Imam Ali (as). A very useful resource in this regard is: Ghadir Khumm: In Qur’an, Hadith and History
"This site is under development. It currently consists of narrations involving 76 Companions, 69 Successors, and 626 Scholars in the chains of transmission, recorded in 182 Sunni books. In addition, there is Arabic text for 387 narrations, English translation for 78 narrations and scanned pages from 54 books
280 quotations on the reliability of narrators are available in Arabic and 324 in English. "