^ that is misinformation islam did not stop after the first 4 khalifhs if that was the case you would not be muslim today just as a simple example the islamic state took the deen to the indian subcontinent if that did not happen we would probably be worshipping a monkey or an elephant today.
The wilayahs (govenors) do have powers that is whole point of islamic system it gives wilyahs certain powers and authority, the only danger that could happen is when the wiliyah becomes to powerful and then stops obeying instructions from the khalifah as was the case in point in andulusia(spain) he cut himself from the islamic state wanted his own islamic state and look what happened to andulusia very brutal and very sad ending indeed.
The checks and balances did not stop after ali(ra) death it was mistake as mentioned several times already, if checks and balances failed i doubt the islamic state would have lasted 10 years let alone the 1400 years that it did last.
Am curious about the books written by “orientalists” mentioned that were written with the intent to undermine Islam.
Could you provide title of a book or name of author?
On issue of books and media … aren’t most 99.5% opinion and remainder the authors understand of facts?
Might your comment regarding western media lying be construed as opinion also?
I think that maybe we (all peoples) have a naturally ingrained human bias when it comes to issues we disagree with that stem from our varying belief systems.
Often we take offense (rightly or wrongly) when an opinon differs from our own.. rather than investigating the ideas responsible.
If only we (all peoples) learn the practise of patience and understanding.
There where many orientalists many possibly hundreds, thier whole purpose was to undermine islam as much as possible.
Even the term orientalist means to study the middle east and east to study what, what was it in the east they so intrested in is it the art the people the language no it was because islamic state was a superpower of the time and Europe was so backward they used to throw the sewage from top window of a house onto the streets below. So these orientlaist went to islamic state with purpose of undermining it.
Some examples include Muslim Studies by Goldziher, al-Islam wa Usul al-Hukm’ by the ever so muslim based name Sir Thomas Arnold , Sir William Muir with his translations of islam most biased but i let you judge You have more recent examples, The Arab Mind by Patai currently used by the US military as a guide on how to sexually torture prisoners.
Add to this the missionary invasion of the islamic state for example what is known today as The American Univeristy of Beruit and the St Joseph Jesuit University these type of institutions where soley based to attack islam both intellectually and politically.
These authors and their books and institutions did there damages and where effective in big way not the entire reason for downfall of the islamic state but they was a tool used by the French, british and Americans, Alhamdulilah they failed to actually blow out the islamic thought completly and today what you see is a revival and the muslim people want the islamic state back because they have had socialism, they have had nationalism, they have had capitalism and they reject all of them and what do they want well why dont you ask them because i am not so arrogant to say i represent the 2 billion muslims out there.
Khlifah selects his son as next khalifah this is fundamental commponent of monarchical system even if the son meets the criteria.
My point about a mistake is, it DOES invalidate the entire chain of Rulers and makes it Monarchy. Whatever good they will do, while they are in power they will not get reward of it. They are not just rulers because their start(base) at which they standing it wrong. This is just like a drop of wine dropped into milk. it will make the whole milk Haram.
It does not mean that you can not take the advantage or benefits from those rulers; you can. Being false rulers they are invalid by themselves will not get any reward. Some people say this; their deeds are good that is why they are okay and acceptable; this is only their justification. Just like a thief start spending money in making a mosque.
This is a general rule and majority of people understand it that selection of a son for successor ship by the king is not the right act and there is no any exemption in it whether the son meets the criteria or not. If we have Islamic system with checks and balances, that system’s rules should first be applied on this action of “selection of son” also.
Of course the problems which are pending should be resolved but it does mean that we force one party to give up. Do you think that somebody would be able to leave his beliefs happily?
If there is something wrong; no harm in saying it wrong whether its a big or small.
No doubt we should learn from mistakes. There is no harm in saying that the monarchical System which was introduced in Islam was wrong and we shell never repeat this mistake again.
Our khilafate Rashda mein tou koei aik tariqa istemal nahe houwa. We had selection, nomination, and refrendum and election. So i think if you like any one of the four methods , are in islam ka daeiray mein. HADAF AIK THA methods used were different.
Your coments are wrong because you misunderstand the islamic state and how the khalifhs were appointed.
throughout the islamic state no single khalifh can get appointed without a bayah.
It is an established fact that there was no hereditary system in the Khilafah. In other words, the hereditary system was not established in the state, by which ruling i.e. the state leadership was acquired as is the case in the monarchy. Instead, the State leadership would be acquired through receiving the bai’ah from the Muslims in some eras, from the influential people (ahle al-halli wal-'aqd) in later eras or as what occurred towards the demise of the state from the Sheikh al-Islam. Never was a single incident reported that the Khaleefah was appointed through inheritance without receiving bai’ah.
However, the manner of attaining bai’ah was misapplied. Thus, a Khaleefah would take a bai’ah from the people before his death for his son, brother, cousin, or any other individual of the family. After the death of the Khaleefah the bai’ah was renewed for that person. This is a misapplication of the bai’ah but it neither constitutes hereditary rule or succession it is similar to when so called democractic countries where if Government backed candidate suceeds it is still called election, so when comes to history of islamic state double standards should not be applied.
Actually I had always thought the title Oriental Studies referenced the Orient. And that the Orient was the far east. China, Malaysia, India, Japan, etc.
AK47, I have to tell you that I have my doubts that the University of Beiruit or the St. Joseph Jesuit University bear guilt or responsibilty toward the destruction of the Islamic State. I will have to study the history of these instutions to be able to comment honestly.
I do think it is possible that these instutions intent could have included posing challenge to existing ideals in order to increase following…but posing challenge does not equate responsibility for the fall of the Khaifah. This perhaps is more rightly blamed on the Ottoman Empire and it’s alliance with the Central Powers during WWI.*
*Note…unstudied reply. Reply = Blather. Speculation. Not based on studied documented facts.
Replies of AK reminds me of many jokes. The train of his religion he feels that is running, I think is just shivering making them to beleive that it is running.
What I really emjoy is that for him his religion does not care of barking dogs, though in practice a little criticism can disturb his and his folk' day and night sleep.
Well if you read my comments furthur on you will see i don’t say these institutions where the entire cause of the downfall of the islamic state i said they where one of the tools used by the likes of the British, French and Americans.
And without a doubt these types of institutions had an agenda to undermine the islamic state at that time.
anjaan keep being part of the pack woof woof yawn!
I would appreciate making me understand the structure of Islamic state and how khalifahs were appointed.
I think we are taking this fact the other way. To clarify it a bit, better we should keep some of basic terms. Four of them were mention by Sokoon (selection, nomination, and referendum and election). Establishment instead of appointment is a better word we should use for founding (or foundation of) a khalafah because appointment can also be used as selection which is one of the four methods of establishments. I hope you got my point; though I wrote in very brief.
There is no defined function or purpose of Bayah (oath of allegiance) mentioned in history because the even of Bayah was not the one which established be Khalafa. To establish khalafah there are four methods as mentioned above. Bayah is not a process of selection, nomination or election of a Khalifah. It is a processes in which a person shows that he is agreed with the establishment of Khalafah by giving oath of allegiance rather than he made his decision in establishing khalafah. So saying ”there was no single Khalifah get appointed without a bayah” is meaningless.
There were lots of (we can say most of ) the incidents reported that the Khaleefah was appointed through inheritance which made it monarchy and they took bayah by hook or by cock. You agreed attaining bayah was misapplied that is why Bayah does not authenticate the righteousness of that Khalafah.
I am also not talking in favor of any democratic system either.
Alhamdulilah you are not in favour of democratic system more people are realising how defunct and shallow of a system it really is.
As for the bayah it is very important part of islam without bayah you cannot establish the islamic state in all 4 methods which you mentioned the bayah is in each one it is the contract. Just some evidences which show how important the bayah is:
Al-Bukhari reported that ‘Ubadah bin as-Samit said: “We made a bay’ah to the Prophet (saw) to hear and to obey in whatever pleases and displeases us, and we should not dispute the authority of those who have been entrusted with it, and that we stand for or speak the truth wherever we are without fearing the blame of any blamer for the sake of Allah.” Al-Bukhari reported from Ayyub from Hafsa from Umm ‘Atiyyah who said: “We gave a bay’ah to the Prophet (saw) and then he read to me that we should not associate anything to Allah and to prohibited us from weeping, upon which a woman amongst us withdrew her hand and said: A woman pleased me and I want to reward (repay) her. He said nothing, so she went and then returned.” Ánd in Al-Bukhari from Abu Hurairah who said: The Prophet (saw) said: “(There are) three persons to whom Allah will not talk on the Resurrection Day, nor purify them, and for them is a severe punishment: A person who has an excess of water on the road and prevents the wayfarer from it; a person who gives bay’ah to an Imam for his worldly affairs only, so if the Imam gave him that which he wants he fulfilled (the bay’ah) to him, otherwise he would not; and a person trading a commodity to another after asr (late afternoon) and he swore by Allah that he was offered so and so for it, although he was not, and the person believed him and bought it.” Al-Bukhari narrated from ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar (RA) who said: “When we gave a bay’ah to the Prophet (saw) to hear and obey, he would say to us: As much as you are able.” Jareer bin ‘Abdullah said: “I gave a bay’ah to the Prophet (saw) to hear and obey and he instructed me: As much as you are able, and to advise every Muslim.” Al-Bukhari narrated from Junada bin Abu Umayyah who said: “We entered the house of ‘Ubadah bin as-Samit while he was ill and we said: May Allah make you a good person, talk to us of a hadith you heard from the Prophet (saw) and with which Allah benefits you. He said: The Prophet (saw) invited us and we gave him our bay’ah. He said in that which he obliged upon us to hear and obey in whatever pleases and displeases us, in our ease and hardship and when we see preference (for others over us), and not to dispute the authority of those who are entrusted with it saying: Unless you see open disbelief (kufr bawah) upon which you have a clear proof from Allah.”
The method to select a khalifh has several methods as mentioned already as long as the selection of the khalifh is based in the islamic framework it is not a problem which of the methods is used.
You talk about “Islamic State” and I am talking about “Khalafah”. If there is a difference between both please mention it.
Bayah is not the requirement to establish a Khalifah. Bayah you are talking about is one sided action. Please read the Aahadith once again and you will see that it was people who were doing Bayah, it was not the requirement of Khalifah/Leader/or Imam to confirm, approve, authorize his leadership from people with the help of process of Bayah. His leadership/Khalafah/or Imamat does not become invalid, unauthorized or unapproved even if a all people refuse to do his bayah; he will still be a leader because this title is not from people its from Allah. But if you think Bayah it required, its not for Khalafah. You can say its for the satisfaction of those people who are following him. They want to pledge themselves for their own sake because they want to get reward of it; its their(people’s) duty to recognize him(khalifah) and give him oath of allegiance. But if they don’t give him oath of allegiance it will not hurt khalifah by any mean. He will still be a Khalifah. Allah will remove all the blessing from people by doing this act. So the bottomline is “Bayah is not the requirement to establish a Khalifah.”
, Sir William Muir with his translations of islam most biased but i let you judge You have more recent examples, The Arab Mind by Patai currently used by the US military as a guide on how to sexually torture prisoners.