"As for treating rulers as sacred or giving them exaggerated respect- as some Islamic sects do today - this has no basis in the religion and no evidence to support it. This idea came from the Shia, who made Imamate a pillar of faith and replaced the testimony of faith with belief in leadership. Ahl al-Sunnah do not hold this view."
Month: April 2025
Caliphate Contentions (8): “We Don’t Need a Caliphate As I can Practise Islam in Safety Today”
To say “we are safe, so we do not need the caliphate” is to confuse the individual's luxury with the community’s duty. It is to claim sufficiency in fragments of the deen, while neglecting its collective expression and divine mandate. It is also complacency and a failure to recognise that their individual circumstances may be in relative comfort due to the space afforded to them by a kufr regime and ideology today, that can be easily taken away tomorrow – leaving them with no recourse to anyone to stand up for them on the basis of Islam either.
Caliphate Contentions (7): The West won’t allow for a Caliphate – Fatalism as Ideology and The Myth of Geopolitical Impossibility
Arguing that the West won't allow the emergence of a Caliphate is not a fiqhī evaluation, but a surrender to the dominant international order - a worldview that elevates the invincibility of global hegemons above the command of the Creator. Such a posture is not realism, but rather despair and cowardice masquerading as maturity.
Featured
Betrayers of the Inheritance (2) – Resistance Scholars vs Regime Scholars
The difference between the scholars of resistance and the scholars of the regime is not one of interpretation. It is one of allegiance. The scholars of the regime have allied themselves with the nation-state, with its borders, treaties, and strategic partnerships. They invoke fiqh only to neuter obligation, to convert jihad into illegal activism, and to criminalize solidarity as sedition. Their invocations of "wisdom" serve only to excuse cowardice.
The Devil’s Deception: Dubai
One of the clearest dividing lines between sincerity and hypocrisy, between a sign of īmān and a sign of kufr, between political insight and wilful ignorance, is where one stands with regard to the UAE regime. Hatred for this regime has become a marker of concern for the Ummah, of clarity, and of Islamic consciousness—whereas love or even tolerance for it is rapidly emerging as a sign of nifāq, of ideological confusion, and of moral failure.