What should be the criteria to be a khalifa of muslim ummah?

Society Religion & Philosophy
81

[QUOTE]
Those who think Aeysha(R) was right must be against Ali and are sunnis
And those who take ALi(R) was right must take him right and must not side AEysha(R)
[/QUOTE]

dear brother this is incorrect, i am not a shia and i do not hate ali infact i love him very dearly and i love his family just as i love the beloved wife aiysha of the prophet (saw) and the other companions such as abu bakr and umar and uthman. we as sunnis love all the companions regardless of what happened between them, we know that some of them have a higher status than others, for example the 4 khalifs are higher degree than the rest and the 10 who were promised jannah and the companions of badr, but we will never revile one single companion because of the praise for them in the quraan and the statements of the prophet (saw) regarding his companions. he has told us to hold back when it concerns his companions. this issue of ali and aiysha involves not just them 2 but other companions, we do not speak about them in a bad way as sum1 mentioned allah protected us from the trail that occured between them so why should we dirty our tongues about these incidents which bring us no benefit. the companions, all of them togehter, are the best of humanity ever raised from mankind after the prophets and messengers, love them like their lord and their teacher the prophet (saw) loved them. let us not be of those people who anger Allah by reviling those whom he loves and has clearly stated his pleasure with them. if allah is pleased with them, then shud we not also be pleased with what allah and his messenger are pleased with. i was infected by this disease of defaming the companions, alhamdolilah allah showed me the light and cured me from this disease which would have landed me into the pitts of the fire.

82

ansaree bhai sahab..there is a very clear hadith in ur sahi books and it said that some sahabas won't join Prophet Mohummad (pbuh&up) in Jannah...what does that tell you? those sahabas were mere humans...humans make mistakes...humans can be greedy and selfish too
what sakoon is trying to say is that the fight was between Haq and Baatil..you have to pick a side

83

i leave it to tawheed to answer u in shaa Allah i dont have time 2 waste with the rejectors and i do not c any gud in discussing with the rejectors

84

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ansaaree: *
i leave it to tawheed to answer u in shaa Allah i dont have time 2 waste with the rejectors and i do not c any gud in discussing with the rejectors
[/QUOTE]
If you are not in to discussion in discussion-forums then your opinion also waste. There is contradiction in that false hadith of those 10s who were promised jannah.

85

[quote]
Islam does have a hukm for every subject if there is new subject matter then the method of ijtihad will be done. For example for the subject of cloning islam has hukms galore.
[/quote]

I beg to differ; Islam does not have hukum for each and every subject for all times. Islam provides the guidelines and some areas are detailed and some are not so detailed and some are not even mentioned. There are plenty of examples; clone like you mentioned is one of them and organ transplant is another one and there are many more that you can easily find. Ijtihad is perfect for such things, Ijtihad is nothing more than a democratic way of solving an issue at hand.

[quote]
Islam has comprehensive ruling system it does not have just basic rules as you mentioned it has laid down complete systems for us to implement today.
[/quote]

Where can I find this? Is it in Quran? I am not being an ass here, I am asking a serious questions I don’t know.

[quote]
Rooted and based on islam, hmmmm saudi,pakistan, iran are also rooted and based on islam and what kind of islamic systems are they implementing 0 and none?
[/quote]

Saudia, based on Islam? Show me an ayah or hadith that talks about monarchy being a legitimate form of governance. Pakistan; I don’t even know what form of government that is anymore. One PM nominating other and that PM nominating a third to me that seems more like Khilafah. Iran, that is neither democracy nor Khilafah. Most of the Muslim countries have neither of these systems. Almost all of them have dictatorship. As far as implementation of Islamic system and rules, we can find many examples from the days of Khilafah where Islamic system was almost non-existent.

I am not denying the fact that we have guidelines and hukums from Allah (SWT) all I am saying why not take them in the current times and implement them based on current needs instead of blindly jumping into a system which has failed in the past. The fault was not with the Allah (SWT)’s message/hukums the fault was with the implementers and they way they these hukums were interpreted and implemented.

86

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ak47: *

If a khalifh is elected it is allowed, the only issue i disagree with you is the definition. Voting is allowed in islam because its is a tool, even silence is a method to select khalifh i.e during khilfah if khalifh is selected and no one said anything or objected then the silence is consent also.

I only disagree when you said the word democracy which is clear indication of a system which advocates man made laws where man is the legislator not allah(swt).

Khalifah is not given the pledge by the ummah merely to be a hired man, executing what the ummah decides - as is the case in the democratic system - he is given the pledge of allegiance by the ummah to execute the rules of the Holy Quran and the Sunnah of the Messenger (SAW), i.e. to execute the shariah Laws and not what people want; and if the people deviated and disobeyed shariah he should fight them until they repented.

As for what happened in ottomani khilafah there where mistakes not only in ottomani khilfah but also in history of islamic state which lasted 1400 years obviously mistake are made why because we are human beings we are designed to make mistakes.

Even examples where muslims had disagreement over ali(ra) etc we can learn not to make these kind of mistakes again. Your learn from the mistakes and the islamic government has checks and balances to ensure these kind of mistakes are not made again.

Question has to be because of the mistakes do we reject entire 1400 years, was all of it was disaster? or is the reality is today our situatin the real disaster without not global islamic state to protect our honour or to propogate our true values.

as you can see in muslim world what they are calling for the return of the islamic state
[/QUOTE]
Voting is not a valid tool to elect Khalifa in Islam. In the process of voting the votes are counted numbers not weigh up in value. We cant assess things with the majority and minority of votes. Such procedure has no support in Quran and Sunna for the issue of leadership of the whole Muslims, because Islam is based on theocracy (kingdom of Allah) and not electing Khalifa using voting system. In fact, Quran denounces the opinion of the majority of people (see 6:116, 5:49, 10:92, 30:8) since the vision of the majority of people is usually impaired due to their tendencies.

2ndly silence can’t be considered to select khalifa. Those people (e.g 65% of registered voters) who don’t participate cant be assumed that they are silent in favor of Khalifa.

Also, what if people choose an unqualified person who seems to be qualified in their eyes, like a hypocrite? How can such corrupt person becomes Ulul-Amr and his obedience becomes necessary? Certainly Allah and His Prophet know better who is more qualified to be successor of the Prophet (PBUH&HF).

87

What should be the criteria to be a khalifa of muslim ummah

Urdu main tarjuma "Abn e khaldoon ka mokadma" ke naam se mashoor hay ... ho sakta hay net par bhi mil jay.

88

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChaChoo: *

I beg to differ; Islam does not have hukum for each and every subject for all times. Islam provides the guidelines and some areas are detailed and some are not so detailed and some are not even mentioned. There are plenty of examples; clone like you mentioned is one of them and organ transplant is another one and there are many more that you can easily find. Ijtihad is perfect for such things, Ijtihad is nothing more than a democratic way of solving an issue at hand.

Where can I find this? Is it in Quran? I am not being an ass here, I am asking a serious questions I don’t know.

Saudia, based on Islam? Show me an ayah or hadith that talks about monarchy being a legitimate form of governance. Pakistan; I don’t even know what form of government that is anymore. One PM nominating other and that PM nominating a third to me that seems more like Khilafah. Iran, that is neither democracy nor Khilafah. Most of the Muslim countries have neither of these systems. Almost all of them have dictatorship. As far as implementation of Islamic system and rules, we can find many examples from the days of Khilafah where Islamic system was almost non-existent.

I am not denying the fact that we have guidelines and hukums from Allah (SWT) all I am saying why not take them in the current times and implement them based on current needs instead of blindly jumping into a system which has failed in the past. The fault was not with the Allah (SWT)’s message/hukums the fault was with the implementers and they way they these hukums were interpreted and implemented.
[/QUOTE]

Islam has hukm for every issue that is why it is such a complete system. Your response is very confused and mixed up i don't even think you know what you are saying on the one hand you say islam does not have hukms then you say islam covers issue of cloning and organ transplant? Here you contradicted yourself.

Next point you said Ijtiad is democractic way of solving an Issue at hand?

The meaning of Ijtihad is means, after acquiring the required knowledge and competence, deducing rules of law through juristic reasoning from original sources (The Qur’an and Sunna, the pronouncements and practices of the Prophet(saw).

You can find the evidences for hukms by the study of Quran, Sunnah, Ijma -as- sahaba and Qiyas. It is not restricted to Quran as you mentioned.

Your point about Saudi and PAkistan shows you didnt read my post properly, I said these countries claim to be based on Islam and what kind of ISlam do they implement 0 and None. This was in response to your point where you said "Same thing here. Point is you are not giving birth to a new ideology here by putting Islam outside of it and making a new system. Like I said many times before it should be rooted in and based upon Islam." Saudi and pakistan have this model and you can see what failure and disaster it has been.

Your weak argument that khilafah never existed is another routine argument given by secularists and is easily refuted Shariah was implemented in the History of Khilafah to pick up on mistakes does not invalidate the entire history. It is like saying if Amerikka made mistakes then there system of capitalism was not really capitalism which is really a nonsense argument because everybody knows amerikka is capitalist nation.

A system that has failed in the past why has it failed it worked for 1400 years so what led to the destruction of the islamic state, and why is the entire muslim world wanting this system back today? You answered partly this question but part of the answer also includes the doors on ijtihad where closed earlier in the islamic history so therefore when new problem arose the soloution could not be found. Also the ottomani khilafah which swept through europe did not consolidate there gains and once state became weak and lethargic not being able to provide solotuions it became open to ideas such as nationalsim and this in turn led to break up of the state obviously with instigation from states such as England and France.

So when the islamic state returns it will ensure that these problems which in past led to its downfall will be prevented with the checks and balances in place. You can only learn from mistakes and ensure they don't happen again.

As for the kufr call of democracy which the muslim world has had to suffer from recently it is a complete disaster. If evidence was not enough look at Turkey and Algeria recently the Muslim parties won using the Western game of Democracy and what happened when they scored they got the Red Card, France even mentioned at the time if the Islamists won they would invade and Turkey we all know with the secular extremists in power at moment what they did kicked the muslims out.

89

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by inuit: *
Voting is not a valid tool to elect Khalifa in Islam. In the process of voting the votes are counted numbers not weigh up in value. We cant assess things with the majority and minority of votes. Such procedure has no support in Quran and Sunna for the issue of leadership of the whole Muslims, because Islam is based on theocracy (kingdom of Allah) and not electing Khalifa using voting system. In fact, Quran denounces the opinion of the majority of people (see 6:116, 5:49, 10:92, 30:8) since the vision of the majority of people is usually impaired due to their tendencies.

2ndly silence can’t be considered to select khalifa. Those people (e.g 65% of registered voters) who don’t participate cant be assumed that they are silent in favor of Khalifa.

Also, what if people choose an unqualified person who seems to be qualified in their eyes, like a hypocrite? How can such corrupt person becomes Ulul-Amr and his obedience becomes necessary? Certainly Allah and His Prophet know better who is more qualified to be successor of the Prophet (PBUH&HF).
[/QUOTE]

Whilst it is a duty, because the bay‘ah is fard, it is fard kifayah (collective duty) and not fard ain (individual duty). Thus, if some of the Muslims fulfill it, the duty drops from the rest of the Muslims. But all Muslims must be enabled to practice their right in electing the Khaleefah, regardless of whether they use their right or not. In other words, every Muslim must be able to participate in selecting the Khaleefah. So the issue is to enable the Muslims to carry out the duty of establishing the Khaleefah which Allah (swt) prescribed upon them, in such a way that the sin of not fulfilling this duty is removed from their shoulders. The issue is not the actual participation of all the Muslims in conducting this duty. This is because the duty which Allah (swt) prescribed is to establish the Khaleefah for Muslims by their consent, and it is not a requirement for all Muslims to perform it.

No condition is set concerning a specific number required to appoint the Khaleefah, rather any number of Muslims can give their bay‘ah to the Khaleefah and in this bay‘ah the consent of rest of the Muslims is attained by their silence, or by proceeding to obey him, or by anything which implies their consent, then the appointed Khaleefah becomes a Khaleefah for all the Muslims, and he will be legally the Khaleefah even if only three people appointed him, because collectivity is achieved by carrying out the appointment of the Khaleefah. The consent is achieved by their silence and through obedience or anything similar, on condition that this is accomplished by absolute choice and enabling the expression of opinions fully.

to establish the Khalifah by any gathering whose appointment of the Khalifah achieves the consent of the Muslims by any indication that proves this consent, whether this indication is the pledge of the majority of the influential people, the majority of the representative Muslims, the silent acceptance of the Muslims regarding the group that give the pledge, their hurry to show obedience as a result of the pledge or by any similar means, as long as they were provided with the full facility to freely express their opinions.

As mentioned already several times the voting process itself, it is one of the styles which Allah (swt) has allowed to choose representatives (Wukalaa) (deputies and representatives). The Messenger of Allah (saw) at the second pledge of al-'Aqabah said: "Select from amongst yourselves twelve Naqeebs (representatives) who will be responsible for their people including themselves." That is why it is possible to have this as a style to elect members of the Ummah Council in the Khilafah State who will account the Khaleefah of the Muslims, his assistants, governors, district governors, and as well to monitor their actions and put forward their views about them. Similarly (it can be used as a style) to choose the Khaleefah of the Muslims after the Ahlul Hall Wal 'Aqd short-listed the candidates for the post of Khaleefah.

Your last point is answered by the fact that only qualified candidates are put up, why would they put up unqualified candidates. And islam has listed the conditons of a candidate you can see this in previous answer on this post.

90

Dear Readers,

Salaams,

Inuit, you have totally different ideas. It seems that you are against khelafat, also sheraz seems to have same opinion like you.

The rest of the people have given their opinion almost the same, and they were found to be defending against arguments.

It is so sad we all are muslims; but we are so incapable of peacefully and honorably discussing our religious claims.

How can it be possible to have khalifatul muslameen; when many would not favour a normal pious muslim to be khalifa. As qurashies are not all respected in Pakistan.

Secondly yet to believe that we have any such person in Arabs. Since
what I believe that Quran came in arabic language as ATMAME HUJA for Badowens of arabs. Oil is there, is another ATMAME HUJA; since these arabs used to say to prophet mohammed(pbuh) that you want us to be like this and this, where as we do not have resources to eat etc etc

Regarding saudia ;it is not an acceptable islamic country.

So it means every country can have its own khalifa. But this does not fulfills , the concept of khilafat in islam.

It means all others who are not sunni muslims are right in saying that; they all have their khalifa and they were never without khalifa , after prophet mohammed(pbuh).

in all arabic world we can not see any such person. Such person, among them is like a vanishing point.

So let our president, be given another status as khalifa of our country too, from now onward. What is wrong in that?

Since; we have already gone wrong to carry the correct sequence of khilafat some where in the middle of khalifas of muslims, or else where the selection was wrong say maweya, so all the sequence of khilafat has become a ----

Kindly do not start doing research and working on, to create a sequence of khilafat now, as a result of some ones AATERAZ; since that kind of research just makes others laugh at muslims.(you)

For example the research of grammar of arabic is still in progress due to the fact that other casts of muslims argue with the meaning of certain aayats of Quran. This kind of childish approach does not help at all. It is a cause of showing weakness towards understanding the subject.

Anyway I would try to understand more towards other sets of muslims ,like agha khanies etc, as they have a continuous series of unbreakable khalifa or imam.

This was the reason that Doctor Ahmed Tejjani of Qadria Nasab had converted his fiqha from sunni to shias along with his 500 or more highly educated people.

Also Ismail Deyoubandi, who had also converted to shia, due to the same reasons. This is the person who had proved QADYANIES as non muslims; no one else could do it in whole arab and ajjam(Iran) moullana community, in those days.

To me qadyanies are not non muslims; as they believe in oneness of GOd, in four elhamei books, all ambeyah ,they also believe in prophet mohammed(pbuh).

But later they got confused ; perhaps due to the same reasons of not being satisfied by the explanations of sunni moullanas.

They were too much abadat gozar sunni muslims , at first place. Those days moullanas used to not even discuss this much, they used to say why shall we discuss about those pages of history that are black. And they had prohabitted discussion in islam in totality.

Please comment. Discussions opens doors of understanding, it is a very good way; to explain that you are on correct path; since one set out of 73 firqa would reach to heaven(I have been hearing it from my child hood). Bye sokoon

91

ak47

I agree with you on the point that Islam is a complete system as long as we are allowed to take other things/factors into consideration that are not mentioned in Quran and Hadith. The only way it can be complete if it provides you a general guideline. Some things are clear cut and some are left for Ijtihad and some for common sense.

Saudia and Pakistan can claim all they want that their governing systems are based on Islam that does not make it so. Saddam also chanted Allah-o-Akbar did that make his system Islamic? Islam is being used by these so called leaders of Muslim world to manipulate the people of their countries to secure their powers.

All ruling systems have one fault or the other no system is perfect and history is witness to that. Khilfah had its goods and bads, more bads towards the end of it than goods. The rules and hukums might be divine but the implementers are humans.

Muslim world wanting this system back? Where did you get that from? Yes, there are some religious groups and movements who are pushing for it but to claim that Muslim world wanting this system back might be a tad bit exaggeration. Muslims can't agree on which mosque to pray in let alone choosing a common ruler, Khalifah.

There are more basic issues at hand than implementing Khilfah as we all know it. Khilafah is not the magic pill that will alleviate the suffering of Muslim Ummah.

92

[quote]
* ak47 wrote : *
Whilst it is a duty, because the bay‘ah is fard, it is fard kifayah (collective duty) and not fard ain (individual duty). Thus, if some of the Muslims fulfill it, the duty drops from the rest of the Muslims.
[/quote]
Sounds impracticable; leaving this matter of Khlafat in the hands of people to spoil. At the same time more than one person or groups can be the claimant of this title. Like Khalifa Qadiyani and Khalifa Hajji Noor (wherever and so and so )

There are certain difficulties connected with this view of things that cannot be overlooked or ignored. It is plain that how would we justify that those people how to fulfilled this requirement acquainted God's laws in detail and complete knowledge and understanding.

Another consideration is that whenever a group or class perceives a law to be contrary to its own interests it will find an opening permitting it to violate or subvert the law in question or openly rebel against it. The sense of obedience will then be noticeably weakened in the people, in the absence of any regulatory instance. As a result the very pillars of society will begin to tremble and order and discipline will ultimately vanish.

[quote]
* ak47 wrote : *
But all Muslims must be enabled to practice their right in electing the Khaleefah, regardless of whether they use their right or not. In other words, every Muslim must be able to participate in selecting the Khaleefah. So the issue is to enable the Muslims to carry out the duty of establishing the Khaleefah which Allah (swt) prescribed upon them, in such a way that the sin of not fulfilling this duty is removed from their shoulders.
[/quote]
If it is “must”, who will do this? “They have to do”. “They should do this and that”. These all things you are talking even before establishing the institute of Khalafa. Which we cant even think about that it would be in a proper shape before that dream time.

[quote]
* ak47 wrote : *
No condition is set concerning a specific number required to appoint the Khaleefah, rather any number of Muslims can give their bay‘ah to the Khaleefah and in this bay‘ah the consent of rest of the Muslims is attained by their silence, or by proceeding to obey him, or by anything which implies their consent, then the appointed Khaleefah becomes a Khaleefah for all the Muslims, and he will be legally the Khaleefah even if only three people appointed him, because collectivity is achieved by carrying out the appointment of the Khaleefah. The consent is achieved by their silence and through obedience or anything similar, on condition that this is accomplished by absolute choice and enabling the expression of opinions fully.
[/quote]
“Any number of Muslims can give their bay’ah to the Khaleefa” can also be considered as Fitnah for the rest of the Muslims. And usually they don’t agree with it. This makes the situation more worst, critical and problematic for this kind of system you are talking about.

[quote]
* ak47 wrote : *
Your last point is answered by the fact that only qualified candidates are put up, why would they put up unqualified candidates. And islam has listed the conditons of a candidate you can see this in previous answer on this post.
[/quote]
It means there must be an institution above all this khalafat system that looks after this matter, who is qualified and who is not. People are not capable to judge this.

93

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChaChoo: *
ak47

I agree with you on the point that Islam is a complete system as long as we are allowed to take other things/factors into consideration that are not mentioned in Quran and Hadith. The only way it can be complete if it provides you a general guideline. Some things are clear cut and some are left for Ijtihad and some for common sense.

Saudia and Pakistan can claim all they want that their governing systems are based on Islam that does not make it so. Saddam also chanted Allah-o-Akbar did that make his system Islamic? Islam is being used by these so called leaders of Muslim world to manipulate the people of their countries to secure their powers.

All ruling systems have one fault or the other no system is perfect and history is witness to that. Khilfah had its goods and bads, more bads towards the end of it than goods. The rules and hukums might be divine but the implementers are humans.

Muslim world wanting this system back? Where did you get that from? Yes, there are some religious groups and movements who are pushing for it but to claim that Muslim world wanting this system back might be a tad bit exaggeration. Muslims can't agree on which mosque to pray in let alone choosing a common ruler, Khalifah.

There are more basic issues at hand than implementing Khilfah as we all know it. Khilafah is not the magic pill that will alleviate the suffering of Muslim Ummah.
[/QUOTE]

Saudi arabia, pakistan and saddam manipulate islam to stay in power yes that is right, I have'nt even said opposite to this point you just agreeing with what i already said!

The khilafah system is the best system without a doubt. It is the best system for human beings. The implementors are humans your are right and humans do make mistakes that is natural but there should be checks and balances to ensure not too many of these mistakes happen and islam has this checks and balances also.

It is no exaggeration to say muslim world wants islamic khilafah. Go to any country and they all want islam they may disagree on method but all want this one ummah islamic state. The very secular and pluralistic system in place at the moment in many of the muslim countries which you also call for breeds division, sectarianism and the rest of these wicked ideas.

What is your magic soloution for the muslim world, islam has already defined for us the soloution if you have a better one then tell us because this is after all a discusion forum.

94

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ak47: *
The implementors are humans your are right and humans do make mistakes that is natural but there should be checks and balances to ensure not too many of these mistakes happen and islam has this checks and balances also.
[/QUOTE]
Humans do make mistakes; its their will, that mistake is not from God(Allah). He created us independent in making decisions while choosing right or wrong. But this is not applied to all human being; only those who are chosen ones, are safe from making mistakes because they are the icons to follow all the time. (sorry this is off topic; another debate session is required for this). We are not the one who can even judge it, what mistake and what is not. Whatever those chosen one did was correct and from God(Allah). It’s our belief.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ak47: *
What is your magic soloution for the muslim world, islam has already defined for us the soloution if you have a better one then tell us because this is after all a discusion forum.
[/QUOTE]
What those checks and balances are? As per my opinion those chosen ones are the checks and balances and the true interpreters of Islamic Shariaah from Allah and they are the people of knowledge sent to us by Allah; to whom we shell ask for guideline; they are appointed by Allah. He is Allah who knows the best and He is, who knows what is hearts and what is the most suitable for us. It’s Fazal (Lutf) of Allah that he appointed Kholafa for us. Its on to us we accept them or reject.

95

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by inuit: *
Sounds impracticable; leaving this matter of Khlafat in the hands of people to spoil. At the same time more than one person or groups can be the claimant of this title. Like Khalifa Qadiyani and Khalifa Hajji Noor (wherever and so and so )

There are certain difficulties connected with this view of things that cannot be overlooked or ignored. It is plain that how would we justify that those people how to fulfilled this requirement acquainted God's laws in detail and complete knowledge and understanding.

Another consideration is that whenever a group or class perceives a law to be contrary to its own interests it will find an opening permitting it to violate or subvert the law in question or openly rebel against it. The sense of obedience will then be noticeably weakened in the people, in the absence of any regulatory instance. As a result the very pillars of society will begin to tremble and order and discipline will ultimately vanish.

If it is “must”, who will do this? “They have to do”. “They should do this and that”. These all things you are talking even before establishing the institute of Khalafa. Which we cant even think about that it would be in a proper shape before that dream time.

“Any number of Muslims can give their bay’ah to the Khaleefa” can also be considered as Fitnah for the rest of the Muslims. And usually they don’t agree with it. This makes the situation more worst, critical and problematic for this kind of system you are talking about.

It means there must be an institution above all this khalafat system that looks after this matter, who is qualified and who is not. People are not capable to judge this.
[/QUOTE]

Why is it impracticle on one hand you calling for democracy which is such a messed up system open to corruption where people like saddam Hussien get 95% of vote and where musharaff gets 99% of vote but when you given opportunity to give bayah to khaleefah in islamic system you say it is impracticle this is contradiction in your statement i think you say this because you or i have not lived in islamic state or experienced system that you say it cannot happen If you look at muslim lands they implmenting systems which they hate and is kufr if they can do that why can they not implement a system which the muslims like and want so badly. Secondly i already mentioned that one condition of a khaleefah is that he has to be muslim that answers your point on qadianis.

your next point in Islam the evidence is clear all you have to do is read. For people to manipulate islam in there favour will not be allowed just as in the example of when umar(ra) was kaleefah umar put restriction on Mahr(dowry) when people was getting married because they was poor one old woman stood up and accounted Umar(ra) by saying how can you restrict the dowry where is your evidence for this. Umar(ra) said by allah(swt) this woman is right and i am wrong. Accounting the ruler is the ultimate jihad and this old woman did that by accounting the leader of the state.

Regultory instance? there is an entire government structure put where people can settle there disputes or account even the leader of the state. Can average person in Britian or Amerikka account Bush and Blair no way.

on next point the state is established and structure put into place and then muslims get there chance to give there support to whoever is the candidate.
Today or near future the islamic state is most likely to happen by coup d'état at first.

No condition is set concerning a specific number required to appoint the Khaleefah, rather any number of Muslims can give their bay‘ah to the Khaleefah and in this bay‘ah the consent of rest of the Muslims is attained by their silence, or by proceeding to obey him, or by anything which implies their consent, then the appointed Khaleefah becomes a Khaleefah for all the Muslims, and he will be legally the Khaleefah even if only three people appointed him, because collectivity is achieved by carrying out the appointment of the Khaleefah. The consent is achieved by their silence and through obedience or anything similar, on condition that this is accomplished by absolute choice and enabling the expression of opinions fully.

Your point on who selects candidates who are qualified this is done by the Majlis-Ash-Shura who select who is the best candidates for role of leadership of the state.

96

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by inuit: *
Humans do make mistakes; its their will, that mistake is not from God(Allah). He created us independent in making decisions while choosing right or wrong. But this is not applied to all human being; only those who are chosen ones, are safe from making mistakes because they are the icons to follow all the time. (sorry this is off topic; another debate session is required for this). We are not the one who can even judge it, what mistake and what is not. Whatever those chosen one did was correct and from God(Allah). It’s our belief.

What those checks and balances are? As per my opinion those chosen ones are the checks and balances and the true interpreters of Islamic Shariaah from Allah and they are the people of knowledge sent to us by Allah; to whom we shell ask for guideline; they are appointed by Allah. He is Allah who knows the best and He is, who knows what is hearts and what is the most suitable for us. It’s Fazal (Lutf) of Allah that he appointed Kholafa for us. Its on to us we accept them or reject.
[/QUOTE]

Chosen ones? there are no perfect humans. We have the islamic laws and text which is out guide to make decsions that is what allah(saw) asked us to live by if we do not judge by this what else are we to judge by our foot obviously not we have the guide only thing is we have to follow it.

The State implements Islam while the Ummah keeps a check and balance on the State. In addition, even the process of check and balance has to be based on Islam. The Islamic State would not allow any concept or idea emanating from a source other than Islam, even if it had a similarity to Islam, to take root or establish itself within the social fabric.

Islam has laid down some clear details to ensure that only the laws of Allah (SWT) are implemented and that the ruling remains on an Islamic path. The Khilafah State is an Islamic society where there will naturally be an atmosphere of taqwa (piety), such that rulers, officials and individuals are reminded of Allah (SWT) at all times which will prevent any corruption or violation of Islam. The public opinion in society will be one that is mindful and vigilant of upholding Islam and accounting the ruler, such that he does not step out of line. Finally, Islam has provided a number of mechanisms to the Ummah to voice her opinion, complain and account the ruling authority, such as the Makhamat Al Muzalim (court of unjust acts) and the Majlis Al Ummah (council of Ummah).

97

Salaams,

I do not believe any one from the majlis of ullamas, which we have today, including Moullana Fazllu and moullana Sajjid perhaps know more than many other clean shaved educated people. Why shall we being muslims ourselves surrender infront of them to do checks and balances, for any one who is selected as khalifatul muslameen.

To me it occurs, that the person who has more followers in the muslim world due to his hiigh religious knowledge, should be taken as khalifatul muslameen.

For example moullana khumanei (R) was a person that he had a huge popullation to take him as pious person; not politically , islamically.
So that was the time we would have taken him as khalifatul muslameen.

I have another example in 1971 or near it. On hajje akbar ,there were millions of people and moullanas from all over the world, but when they had to select who would do the namaz of hajje akbar.

Different ullamas were there; but collectively, they took the name of Tabatabaei.

Though he was shia , every one stood up behind him and offered ahkame hajj e akbar the way he recited.

So those days he could have been taken as khalifa.

We can not appoint in any way,we can not select in anyway; it is not the matter of choise, such selection happens automatically.

If we would select, elect , transfer the khelafat. It would stay as we have selected a president and has given him an old dictionary name.

Perhaps this was the reason that muslims could not have a correct sequence of khilafat. If perhaps, (as agha khanis,say), the first selection would have been correct ; for example umer(R) would have been the first one , and he would have not given his post as present to hazrat abu bakar(R), I think the sequence of khilafat would have been different and would have been continued or we would have made an educated person khalifa, then also the seqeuence of khilafat like shias of all sets, who have unbroken sequence of khalifas, they call them imam; we also would have been valid sequence of khulafas.

I think, this way, if my thinking is not right, you can comment by all means, my pleasure.

Look suppose I am an English teacher and I leave the job, then in a good examplary school, they would replace me with an English teacher only , they would not replace me with a french or history or any other subject teacher.

If they would not get better teacher than me, then they would try to get some one less qualified than me; but they would not take another subject teacher, it would not solve the purpose although the new teacher with other subject may teach english ,but the quality teaching can not take place, there would be defective teaching.

So in selecting a teacher of more or less my caliber the school would try to atleast hire an English teacher who had just qualified through my teaching.

So I guess to select for the seat of prophet (P)--who was total elme din, the one whose teacher was GOD himself. Was it possible for them to bring a person like him for dine.?

In the light of above facts ALI would have been the best choise ; as he had been educated from the first day by prophet mohammed(P)

It is very difficult to realize and accept, the reality, one should bear a very high moral character to think in an totally new directions, but there are people who have been thinking like this.

Half, rather more than half of muslim popullation take Ali as first person for dine.

Note: 70% of Bahrain are of this aqida
60% of kuwaitis
30% of yamanis including zaidis
15% to 20% in Egypt
about 45 % inPakistan
98% in Iran
75% in Iraq
10% in saudia and you can add all those who take ALi as first person after prophet mohammed(P), I have left so many countries statistics, but it is true. They( more muslims) all have given him status of imam.

We would have given him status of khalifa

Also it seems correct status to call imam as we all muslims believe in that imam mehdi Hadi would come near Qayamat.

It does not say khalifa would come.

We can correct ourselves as worldly presidents like today's to be called khalifas and elahi religious ones as imams.

wasaalam sokoon

98

^
Hudhaifah bin Al-Yaman reported that the Messenger of Allah(saw) said:

The Prophethood will remain among you for as long as Allah wills, then Allah will lift it when He wishes to, then it will be a Khilafah Rashidah (Rightly Guided) on the method of the Prophethood, it will remain for as long as Allah wills,

then Allah will lift it if He wishes,then it will be a hereditary leadership which will remain for as long as Allah wills,

then He will lift it if he wishes, then it will be a tyrannical rule, and it will remain so for as long as Allah wills,

then He will lift it if He wishes, then it will be a Khilafah on the method of the Prophethood, then he kept silent."

99

Re: ak47

Salaams,

I hope you would not mind me writing the following.

I do not think this is a correct hadeez. It is concocted story. You can give this topic on geo. tv program Alif, you would see all muslims including from both sunnis and shia would discuss and would reach to same conclusion.

For an hadeez to be taken correct, first test is ,it should tele with quran .
Rasoul never ever said any thing himself, but after wahe.

Quran says that in all times you would have khalifatul arz.

There are many such ahadeez which are concocted. To satisfy, themselves. To get peace of mind.

For example: writing for yazeed rahmat ullah aleh.

I aksed why ? he was so cruel. He killed rasoul's family members.

I got immediately an ahdeez in favour of yazeed, that since he had repented, since he asked for forgiveness for three months GOD would forgive, him for sure.

How would GOD forgive some one if he kills your child. You are the person at first place to grant forgiveness, and then the murderer can ask for forgiveness from GOd and can have hope, to be forgiven.
If yazeed is from my forefathers, I would try to ask for his forgiveness; but until Rasoul and his family would not forgive him, my prayer would not work.

There are thousands of hadeez which are concocted.

It is said people of those days had collected the ahadeez, and wrote them.

first thing if today I give you some explanation of some kind, you can not reproduce, it the same way. Since they were human being like us , rather less intelligent than us,since their environment was not so technically high, they were not exposed till the reality of space and other achievements of today's mankind.

If you just play a game today, you say some thing to some one, the statements, the words , changes within a few days, in the process of reproducing. Sometime rather most of the time total meaning and words change. Humans of those days were just normal human being .

So the KASOUTI of taking any hadeez is, it must match with Quran, as rasoul 's one purpose to be send by GOD is to read aayat, explain aayat and tell as their implementation in daily life.(sorahe jumma)

He was not allowed to change anything of quran and say, it is like this.If this would have been the case; then NAOUZO BILLAH our GOD when says that this of his book is true from azal till abad.And if changed was required, then GOD's claim for quran -----is under question or ----

I would further try to get more educated on this topic as I am not, yet satisfied.

I, never ever feel satisfied when my father tells me ahadeez from Aeysha(R). I always get in trouble from my father.

I say GOD has put his rules in Quran. Every thing if, is hadeez must match with quran.

In accepting some one there should be two witnesses of men or two ladies and one men.

In case of aeysha(R), although she was just 15, neither was she mother
of any child to have experience to be called big. She was a child, baby.

How come we are happy and feel pleasure and get satisfaction, to break the law of GOD to have shahadat of two men or two ladies and one men.

All the ahadeez only through one lady! I say to my father I am not bound to believe in these ahadeez. The witness is against GOD'S principle.

Yes people at that time took those, as correct, due to the fact that her father was Khalifa(a strong post of muslims).

So any thing which is contrary or does not match Quran can not be forced to be taken for granted by a person like me. bye sokoon

100

Hold on i am confused you are saying hadith is false if it does'nt match with quran?

There are many actions included in islam which are not in quran including how to pray how to rule how to implement system etc.

The hadith is sound and has many backers the hadith can be found in As-Silsilah As-Sahihah, vol. 1, no. 5.

Ahmad, Tirmidhi and others, Sahih Al-Jami` ' As-Saghir no. 3341

The same hadith without any change of a word is also narrated by Hadrat Nauman Ibn-e-Basheer Radiyallaho Anhu in Musnad-e-Ahmad Ibn-e-Hanbal.

there are many false hadiths i agree but this one i am sure from what i remember has strong sources to confirm its authenticity.