Education (Islamic and Western) and Awareness is the only hope for Muslims!
New Century New System!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Islamabad: *
Education (Islamic and Western) and Awareness is the only hope for Muslims!
New Century New System!
[/QUOTE]
Assalamo alaikum
The education of the masses is a duty undertaken by the government just like health, providing jobs, housing, electricity/gas etc. The government has the tools at its disposal to spend from its revenue upon the masses and ensure the basic neccesities are being provided to its citizens. So maths, english, science, islamic studies and other subjects which are not reflective of any foreign culture would be part of the education curriculum.
However to hope that the massses will be educated before a change in the political system is viewing the array of problems in a shallow way. This is because the cause of our decline and our rise is not dependent upon academic education rather the ideas, the emotions and systems that exist amongst society. If there were to be a change it would occur after the thoughts, emotions and systems were changed. This is the case in any society. So as an example, in Pakistan, the current ideas that exist are of nationalism and democracy (man made system)and many others.
If these ideas exist backed by the emotion towards nationalism ie people have pride in being pakistani, then you will continue to have a nationalistic state as its existent is supported by the masses. However, if there were to occur a change in these ideas and people left the idea of nationalism and clung onto the idea of islamic ummah and dropped the idea of nation states and they were to have love for this, then the masses would naturally see the incompatability of the system with thier aqeedah (of Islam) and this change of ideas would be a cause of presure upon the system which functions according to a nationalistic basis. Yet the masses could not have learnt science or english but the masses naturally work to remove the system.
As for the system, it would also need to be addressed to the ummah by showing the corruption of it and how it does not stem from thier aqeedah and is not a system that came from Islam.
In any society, if the public opinion is against the government and has remained for a period of time, then the government sees it as a threat and works to undermine it as if it remains stable it will be the cause of a reolution, in our case the return of the khilafah state.
Yes, influential and educated people are needed as they are the cream of the society but if it is hoped that all or the majority of the ummah has this position then this is not practical as in any society you always have the laymen and the influential. In pakistan we have many influentials and they need to hear the call of khilafah so that they may be the ones who bring the change with the will of Allah (swt).
As for the issue of having a new system due to a new century, this would be welcomed by the america and britain but not accepted by our Rabb or our messenger (saw) as they have shown the details of our political system and how it functions. Saying that this model is too old and impractical suggests that allah (swt) gave us a system that is outdated and impractical, which is absurd.
The messenger told us that our political system is the Khilafah and the leader is the khalifah, he said in a hadith narrated by Abu Hurraira The children of banu israel were ruled by Prophets, when one died another succeded him. There will be no Prophet after me but there will be khulafah (plural of khalifah) and they will number many. ** The sahabah asked, what do you order us? He (saw) said "fulfill the oath of allegiance to them one after the other and verily Allah will ask them of what he entrusted them with**
So the command was to appoint a khalifah not a prime minister or a president and the khilafah is our system. More over, the Prophet informed us that the khilafah would return on the method of the Prophet and he did not mention a union, federation, monarchy or any other system.
JazakAllah khair
Wa salaam
HT is the most dodgy organisation around. I still remember coming out of the mosque after Jumma and meeting this HT member,. He gave me a leaflet regarding the anti war match and tried to persuade me that going to the anti war march was against Islam because we are following the banners of the west and we should not turn to the leaders of the west to stop the war.
What a silly way of trying to convince someone. It was the genuine HT too so dont say that ahhh it might have been someone else. Anyway I asked him, if the leaders of the west are not goign to stop this war then who is? your chacha? :)
Anyway we have to start reforming ourselfs at home first before we even get close to establishing a khalifa. The head of a home is a khalifa for that household. We cant even stay at peace with our muslim neighbours and how do we expect a khalifa?
This HT group just goes on and on about the Khalfa, its the only thing they know.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by rizwanfareed: *
HT is the most dodgy organisation around. I still remember coming out of the mosque after Jumma and meeting this HT member,. He gave me a leaflet regarding the anti war match and tried to persuade me that going to the anti war march was against Islam because we are following the banners of the west and we should not turn to the leaders of the west to stop the war.
What a silly way of trying to convince someone. It was the genuine HT too so dont say that ahhh it might have been someone else. Anyway I asked him, if the leaders of the west are not goign to stop this war then who is? your chacha? :)
Anyway we have to start reforming ourselfs at home first before we even get close to establishing a khalifa. The head of a home is a khalifa for that household. We cant even stay at peace with our muslim neighbours and how do we expect a khalifa?
This HT group just goes on and on about the Khalfa, its the only thing they know.
[/QUOTE]
Assalamo alaikum brother Rizwan, i hope you and your family are fine and are in good health.
Inshallah i will not comment on the anti war march because it would cause me to deviate from the subject. But before i make a comment i would just like to know your comprehensive view towards the revival of Islam and its detailed steps backed by the Islamic evidences.
JazakAllah khair
Your brother , Ali
what has these stop war uk muslim groups said about the muslims of iraq who want islamic state.
Why is that they are islamic groups they claim they have many words to say on stop war marches but they have'nt said anything on islamic state which the muslims of iraq have demanded. Does anyone have any comments on this subject or reasons why there is silence from these groups on this question?
Tell me please of the benefits of life living under a theocratic Muslim rule.
Tell me...I am free? As a woman I am free to make my own decisions about the way I wan't to raise my children, about the way I want them educated, even though I may disagree with mainstream Islam.
Would I still have the right to disagree?
Or would I be secretly killed?
What would happen?
Perhaps I want to take my children on a voyage of discovery throughout the world.
Mostly I want my children to be educated enough to make their own decisions and decide for their own self the life they want to live.
Right or Wrong?
I wan't my daughter to know that she is able to provide for her own self.
And have the confidence to know that the decisions she makes are the right ones for her life.
And mostly I want her to know that when she makes a decision, the decision should be based on what makes her happy, rather than to please me or another.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
Tell me please of the benefits of life living under a theocratic Muslim rule.
Tell me...I am free? As a woman I am free to make my own decisions about the way I wan't to raise my children, about the way I want them educated, even though I may disagree with mainstream Islam.
Would I still have the right to disagree?
Or would I be secretly killed?
What would happen?
Perhaps I want to take my children on a voyage of discovery throughout the world.
Mostly I want my children to be educated enough to make their own decisions and decide for their own self the life they want to live.
Right or Wrong?
I wan't my daughter to know that she is able to provide for her own self.
And have the confidence to know that the decisions she makes are the right ones for her life.
And mostly I want her to know that when she makes a decision, the decision should be based on what makes her happy, rather than to please me or another.
[/QUOTE]
Thankyou for your comment/questions.
The first point that i would like to make is that no body in the world is free, in fact the notion of freedom cannot practically exist. The thoery of freedom does exist but can never be applied practically.
Let me explain...
So you live in America, are there are restrictions upon your behaviour and are thier any restrictions imposed upon society?
Can anybody do anything and claim that they are free to do anything they want?
Obviously not. In any society, there are predominant ideas that the people hold onto and there are always punishments that are imposed upon people that violate the law of the land. So in essence, freedom can never exist as you would be arrested or fined for violating certain laws even though you might have considered that action as a normal action. So you are not free rather your behaviour is restricted by your own convictions and the law of that country.
So the main point being, you are never free in any society, whether in the east or west. as an example, if people opened up a school which taught education which was not in accordance with the government policies, they would be put to trial . So laws are restricting the way people act and these punishments act as a deterent to break the law.
In the same manner, under the Islamic system (which is not theocractic) there are laws which people have to obey as citizens of that state and they can account the leader for his misapplications of certain laws as long as the accountability was based upon the law of the land. Just like in the west, it would be an offence if the Prime ministers actions would be judged in accordance with the bible as the west promotes the separation of religion from politics.
Non muslims have in the past lived under the Islamic system and have lived and even fought side by side with them against agressing enemies. They enjoyed peace as Islam gives rights and full protection to all its citizens and ensures that thier needs are being catered for.
Maybe.
Possibility exists.
Possibility exists that a free democracy cares more for you than a theocracy.
What if I don't believe in the theocracy being preached?
Doesn't mean I don't believe in God. Means that I absolutely don"t approve of the way god"s name and idea is being used today.
I think the people that use the good name as excuses are in the wrong.
May God forgive them.
Khilafah you are just beating around the bush and dint even attempt to answer any single of the questions asked. For AAG: tell me something, why do you women even need to worry about providing for yourself when its your man's obligation to provide for you in Islam. Men should be at a constant beck and call of their women. If they dont do so, then the blame lies with the men. If they treat you bad, then shame on them cuz they arent man enough to face reality, taking out their anger on a defensless women. See the problem here lies with us, muslims. When we start picking and choosing from the religon, its bound to produce bad results. Results that we see today, that are projected even horrifically in the Western media. The gist of the hadith says that a man could marry up to 4, but ONLY if he is just. Now we take the first part of this hadith, and disregard the latter. If we cant do justice with the hadith how can we do justice among ourselves. As I have come to think, the cure lies with us. We are quick to blame the zionist (in case of arabs) and hindus (in case of pakistanis), yet we don't reflect upon the rulers currently governing us. Coming from pakistan to the west, the hatred of hindus has almost subsided, being replaced by the jews. And now I think as to why that is so. There is no doubt that both of the above have commited numerous crimes agianst us, but were'nt we being conditioned to hate them just so that our corrupt rulers can keep their empires. They say lets do jehad in Kashmir and liberate it...well once you liberate it what are you gona replace ot with...another corrupt dictatorship...Allah Allah khair salah. To replace a system you need a backup system that is ready to be implemented. And right now I dont see the muslims coming even close to it.
Assalamo alaikum my dear brother
JazakAllah khair for your post and your points are appreciated.
You mentioned:
**We are quick to blame the zionist (in case of arabs) and hindus (in case of pakistanis), yet we don’t reflect upon the rulers currently governing us. Coming from pakistan to the west, the hatred of hindus has almost subsided, being replaced by the jews. And now I think as to why that is so. There is no doubt that both of the above have commited numerous crimes agianst us, but were’nt we being conditioned to hate them just so that our corrupt rulers can keep their empires. They say lets do jehad in Kashmir and liberate it…well once you liberate it what are you gona replace ot with…another corrupt dictatorship…Allah Allah khair salah. To replace a system you need a backup system that is ready to be implemented. And right now I dont see the muslims coming even close to it. **
Excellent point that i agree with when you said that the corrupt rulers in the muslim countries vent the anger of the ummah by diverting it to the western rulers:k:
You also mentioned that when people is looking to replace a system with another they need to have an alternative system. This is an accurate statement and cannot be argued upon.
The muslim ummah has never been short of a political system and has in the past implemented it for over 1300 years. At times there was tranquility and at other times there were bad situations not due to the system but because of the people at the top.
The muslims are rediscovering the system that has been outlined by Islam by the growing awareness amongst this ummah. Hizb ut tahrir has studied the Islamic texts (Quran and Sunnah) and has extracted the necessary understanding of the political system laid out by the Shariah. It has also looked at the practical method, which Islam gives, in order to implement the rules and the different organs of the state.
If you want, i can email the book called “the ruling system in Islam” written by sheikh Taquiddin an Nabhani and Abdul Qadeem zaloom. In it, the details of the practical function of the state is outlined.
In brief the principles of the Islamic khilafah system are:
- The sovereingty belongs to the Shariah
- The authority (right to choose thier leader) belongs to the ummah
- It is an obligation to have one khalifah at any one time
- The right to adopt laws and cannons is a right for the Khaleefah
The pillars of the state are:
- The khaleefah
- The delegated assistants
- The executive assistants
- The walis (governors of provinces)
- The Ameer of jihad
- The administrative departments
- The majlis al ummah (consultative assembly)
- The judiciary
So the above are the institutions that Islam has laid out and each one has evidences from the Quran and Sunnah to indicate thier existance.
Hizb ut tahrir in its books has produced a constitution for the Islamic khilafah state and again if you would like that just send me your email address and i would hapily send it to you.
Please comment
take care, wa salaam
Hizb ut tahrir has studied the Islamic texts (Quran and Sunnah) and has extracted the necessary understanding of the political system laid out by the Shariah.<<
Yes your scholars have surly extracted the necessary understanding of the polictical system: Your claim that whenever the person is able to conclude rules, he becomes a mujtahid. Your Kitab At-Tafkir pg 147: “The mujtahid does not need to know the fundamentals of al-fiqh or the Ayat and hadiths.”
Hizb ut tahrir in its books has produced a constitution for the Islamic khilafah<<
Your book Nidham ul-Islam, page 79: “If he did not apply the rules of the Religion or was unable to carry out the affairs of the state it becomes obligatory to remove him immediately.” is contrary to the hadith related by Muslim: He who hates something about his Amir, let him be patient with him; for there is no one among the people who walks away half a cubit from the caliph and dies with that status, except his death will be similar to the one who dies in ignorance.
Your organization is #1 when it comes to picking and choosing hadith. A hadith related my Muslim: He who withdraws his hand from the obedience (i.e. to the caliph) will face in the Hereafter the judgment of Allah without an excuse. The one who dies without a pledge of allegiance will die similar to the one who dies in a state of ignorance. Hizb at-Tahrir mention repeatedly the last part of the hadith to the people: “The one who dies without a pledge of allegiance will die similar to the one who dies in a state of ignorance.” The meaning of the hadith is not what they claim. Rather, the meaning is that the one who rebels against the caliph and remains in rebellion until death, then his death will be similar to the one who dies in a state of ignorance. Your founder Taqiyyud-Din an-Nabahaniyy claimed to divide the countries among his three children. He called one of them the Amir of Iraq, the second the Amir of the lands of ash-Sham, and the third the Amir of Egypt. Moreover, he claimed the title of ‘Umm-ul-Mu’minin’ for his wife.
http://www.aicp.org/IslamicInformation/English/HizbAtTahrir.htm
Lunatic Calm, That was an extremely interesting post :k: Wonderful comments.
Thanx 4 ur comment/question lunactic, just a few point about what u said:
- He who hates something about his Amir, let him be patient with him; for there is no one among the people who walks away half a cubit from the caliph and dies with that status, except his death will be similar to the one who dies in ignorance.*>>>>>.
The hadith mentions a Amir and Caliph, this is not just any muslim leader but a leader who rules by islam,implements islam as a system, if he does'nt rule by islam then he is not consider a Amir/Caliph(hence it is allwoed to remove him)..... so at any point if a amir/caliph stops ruling by islam then he has to be removed.
hadith:* "the best shadahh is Abu Humza and a man who stood up to a tryrant ruler and accounted him and was killed for it"*
From above one can conclude its ALLOWED to account the rulers.And at this moment of time, since none of the muslim rulers including the Saudi rulers (who print free quran) are NOT Caliph as they don't rule by islam, it is VITAL that we remove them from power.
So what you qouted from the Hizb-ut-tahrir book is correct:
"If he did not apply the rules of the Religion or was unable to carry out the affairs of the state it becomes obligatory to remove him immediately."
2nd point
"He who withdraws his hand from the obedience (i.e. to the caliph) will face in the Hereafter the judgment of Allah without an excuse. The one who dies without a pledge of allegiance will die similar to the one who dies in a state of ignorance. "
[QUOTE]
Rather, the meaning is that the one who rebels against the caliph and remains in rebellion until death, then his death will be similar to the one who dies in a state of ignorance
[/QUOTE]
the latter part of the hadiths is
iWhoso takes off his hand from allegiance to Allah (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) will meet Him (Subhaanahu Wa Ta’Ala) 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.”.”*
Meaning of latter part of the hadith is that the prophet(Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) 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 (Salallahu Alaihi Wasalaam) made it obligatory upon every Muslim to have on his neck a bay‘ah to a Khaleefah.
First half as you have mentioned is regarding when a Khilafah exists and latter part is regarding when a Khilafah doesnt exist (i.e todays time, no Khilafah exists)...
The hadith id clear in its meaning, you agree or not?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Khilafah1422: *
The Islamic khilafah system is not a theocratic system in it's ideas nor in it'a application. this is because a theocratic state has certain charecteristics which the islamic system does not possess.
your mistake in calling the islamic political system a theocracy indicates that you are not aquanted with the correct criteria of a theocracy. the reality of a theocratic system is fixed and has a particular shape and form, two of its charecteristics being:
1) God chooses the leader of that nation and the people have no authority in choosing their leaders
2) The leader should be immune from error
These two charecteristics do not exist in the islamic system as the khalifah is appointed to his post by the consent of the people and it is not a condition that he be infallible rather infallability only exists in Prophets.
The other point of people being having to adhere to religious laws and how they should not be compelled to obey those laws. This in fact is an incorrect view because these laws have come to address human problems and not muslims problems. As an example, if a muslim or a non muslim raped another women then the legal law would be applied upon them both since these laws have come to deal with the relationship between men and women and not muslim men and women. Similarly the law allows the aquisition of private property, this applis to men, women, muslims and non muslims.
Therefore the correct view towards this issue is that there is an intellectual basis that provides laws for the regulation of society and it is applied equally upon all of its citizens without discrimination.
Why is it not said that the muslims living in the west should not be forced to live thier lives by the laws that emanate from secularism and that this is enforcing a viewpoint upon people who dont believe in secularism. My point being that any state which posseses an ideology will implement it upon its citizens and ensure its application upon all. hence islam is not a dogma which is enforced upon people rather it is a political ideology which has laws regarding all affairs and it implements them upon those who live under its authority.
[/QUOTE]
Even though the U.S. respects freedom of religion, the citizens of the U.S. are obligated to follow the law, even if they don't agree with the securlism of the U.S.
The laws were created by a secular system, and sworn to by its citizens.
Yet..those of the Islamic belief are free to follow the laws of Islam as long as those laws do not infringe upon the secular law of the U.S.
Yet..those of the Judaic belief are free to follow the laws of Judism as long as those laws do not infringe upon the secular law of the U.S.
Yet those of the catholic faith are free to express their beliefs as long as they do not infringe upon the secular law of the people.
And so on.
Which is completely different from what I gleen of an Islamic Kiafah. How can you state that an Islamic Kiafah is not a theocracy?
If you believe that a theocracatic government is apointed by god? And if you decide to follow God by the rules of Mohammad..are you not creating a theocratic government? Because in your thinking its what Mohammad decreed?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
Even though the U.S. respects freedom of religion, the citizens of the U.S. are obligated to follow the law, even if they don't agree with the securlism of the U.S.
The laws were created by a secular system, and sworn to by its citizens.
Yet..those of the Islamic belief are free to follow the laws of Islam as long as those laws do not infringe upon the secular law of the U.S.
Yet..those of the Judaic belief are free to follow the laws of Judism as long as those laws do not infringe upon the secular law of the U.S.
Yet those of the catholic faith are free to express their beliefs as long as they do not infringe upon the secular law of the people.
And so on.
Which is completely different from what I gleen of an Islamic Kiafah. How can you state that an Islamic Kiafah is not a theocracy?
If you believe that a theocracatic government is apointed by god? And if you decide to follow God by the rules of Mohammad..are you not creating a theocratic government? Because in your thinking its what Mohammad decreed?
[/QUOTE]
A theocratic or spiritual system implies that rule is confined to a spiritual elite who are themselves above the law, as was applied in european countries ruled by Christian Kingship in the past. This is in stark contrast to the Islamic system, where their is no such concept of spiritual class, all people are subject to the same laws. The difference between this and secular law is that the source of legislation is God rather than Man, this does not make it a theocratic system. People are free to practice their own religions provided they do not infringe upon the law of Islam, religion is not forced upon anyone. The ruler is elected by the people and he applies the laws of Islam.
Khalifah bhai... I have a small question for you...
As you know, I am all in favour of uniting Muslims from all part of the world... Let's say that it happens, Muslims agree to unite... What will happen then? Would they be willing to adopt someone from let's say an Arabic country, or a person like Osama as their Caliph? The entire though of unification would go down the drain... And oh yes, let's say for example a person like Musharraf or a technocrat were to be the best man to lead all the Muslims, but then again, Hizb would not like peoplel like that, since they are infidels kuffars according to them... Dont expect us to unite and accept a Hizb leader as the Caliph, as I would seriously doubt the calliber of a man from that organization, who wouldnt be even close to having what it takes to lead all these countries... What then, my friend? I would be interested in your reply.
People are free to practice their own religions provided they do not infringe upon the law of Islam
The first half of this sentence is negated by the 2nd half. How can one be free to practice their own religion if they must follow the laws of a different religion? Other religions would find the laws of Islam contradtictory to their own religous beliefs. If "the source of legislation is God rather than Man", you are talking about Your God, not necessarily The God or My God. That is forced religion any way you slice it.
A theocracy does not imply "rule by spiritual elites above the law". The definition of a theocracy is a government ruled by or subject to religious authority which is what a khilafah advocates. AAG is correct is stating that a khilafah would indeed be a theocracy.
The biggest fallacy to this type of government is that the books on which you will base your laws were written for nomadic desert dwellers of the 7th century whose violent tribal society has very little to do with today's dynamic world. How can one run a society when such basic and nonsensical rules such as wearing lipstick are still being debated? Rules and laws based on these texts could only work if God Himself were part of the interpretive legislative process. Short of this, any government would have little legitimacy as the law of God.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Spock: *
Khalifah bhai... I have a small question for you...
As you know, I am all in favour of uniting Muslims from all part of the world... Let's say that it happens, Muslims agree to unite... What will happen then? Would they be willing to adopt someone from let's say an Arabic country, or a person like Osama as their Caliph? The entire though of unification would go down the drain... And oh yes, let's say for example a person like Musharraf or a technocrat were to be the best man to lead all the Muslims, but then again, Hizb would not like peoplel like that, since they are infidels kuffars according to them... Dont expect us to unite and accept a Hizb leader as the Caliph, as I would seriously doubt the calliber of a man from that organization, who wouldnt be even close to having what it takes to lead all these countries... What then, my friend? I would be interested in your reply.
[/QUOTE]
Assalamo alaikum
Unification of muslim lands will most likely occur when an Islamic state is established in one or more countries together which unify behind a khalifah. Then the call to the rest of the ummah would be made and they would be reminded about thier obligation from Allah (swt) to unite.
Now to answer your point about the person who would take this post. This post could be taken by any muslim who fulfills 7 conditions as laid by Islam. The conditions of the khilafah contract being that the khalifah be:
1) Muslim
2) Sane
3) Just
4) Capable
5) Male
6) Mature
7) freeman ie not slave
There are many muslims who have these qualities and atributes and colour and nationality are not conditions for the post of khalifah. So if any brother took this post and he implemented Islam domestically then I am obliged from Islam to obey him even though i might dislike him, for the Prophet (saw) said " Whoever sees something in his Ameer something which displeases him he should remain patient, for he who separates himself from the authority of Islam, dies the death of ignorance".
So even if he is not from hizb ut tahrir i would obey him and support his khilafah and even if you took this post i would give my oath of alegiance to you :biggthumb so long as you adhered to the shariah in your actions.
As for an arab or a non arab being a khalifah, Islam tells us that an arab is no better than non arab except in Taqwa (fear of Allah). So i would embrace the khalifah whether he was arab or a non arab, for we are a global ummah unified by our belief.
Wa salaam
So a muslim woman who is free, sane, mature, just and capable cannot lead the ummah? Dont you think that is a bit ridiculous.
The very fact that they can't be a slave shows how outdated and distorted this list is.