Dr Reza Pankhurst critiques the podcast with Dr. Yasir Qadhi, arguing that real change for the Muslim ummah cannot come from within the current world order, which serves Western interests. The establishment of an Islamic state (Khilafa) is deemed crucial for defending and uniting Muslims, contrasting YQ's view of it as a low-priority, idealistic goal.
Rebellion and Islam - when the appointment of the Islamic rulers became akin to a hereditary process, was rebellion the natural outcome? And did restricting rebellion restrict the choice of the umma?
Hadith 34 Only the Imam is a shield, behind whom you fight and you protect yourself with, so if he orders by taqwa and is just then he has reward for that, and if he orders by other than that then it is against himself (Muslim) Commentary A: Imam Nawawi explained the shield as being … Continue reading The Imam is a Shield
Hadith 6 It has been narrated on the authority of Junida bin Abu Umayya who said: We called upon 'Ubada bin as-Samit who was ill and said to him: May God give you health - narrate to us a tradition which God may prove beneficial (to us) and which you have heard from the Messenger … Continue reading Islamic Rule – The Islamic Aqeedah is the basis for the State and its expansion
Hadith 5 إِذَا بُويِعَ لِخَلِيفَتَيْنِ فَاقْتُلُوا الآخِرَ مِنْهُمَاIf the pledge of allegiance is given to 2 rulers (Khalifatain), kill the latter of them(Muslim) Commentary a. Additional proof used by the consensus that it is not permitted for the Muslims to have more than one Khalifah at any given time, as explained by Imam Nawawi as … Continue reading Islamic Rule – Obligation of a single ruler
Hadith 3 مَنْ خَلَعَ يَدًا مِنْ طَاعَةٍ لَقِىَ اللَّهَ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ وَلاَ حُجَّةَ لَهُ وَمَنْ مَاتَ وَلَيْسَ فِى عُنُقِهِ بَيْعَةٌ مَاتَ مِيتَةً جَاهِلِيَّةًWhoever removes his hand from obedience (to the ruler) will meet Allah with no proof for himself, and whoever dies without the pledge of allegiance (to the ruler) upon his neck dies a … Continue reading Islamic Rule – Obligation of the Khilafah
Hadith 2 تَكُونُ النُّبُوَّةُ فِيكُمْ مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ أَنْ تَكُونَ ثُمَّ يَرْفَعُهَا إِذَا شَاءَ أَنْ يَرْفَعَهَا ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةٌ عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّةِ فَتَكُونُ مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ أَنْ تَكُونَ ثُمَّ يَرْفَعُهَا إِذَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ أَنْ يَرْفَعَهَا ثُمَّ تَكُونُ مُلْكًا عَاضا فَيَكُونُ مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ أَنْ يَكُونَ ثُمَّ يَرْفَعُهَا إِذَا شَاءَ أَنْ يَرْفَعَهَا ثُمَّتَكُونُ مُلْكًا جَبْرِيَّةً فَتَكُونُ … Continue reading Islamic Rule – Prophecy of the return of the Khilafah upon the Prophetic example
(The following is a section reproduced with minor edits from an article originally published in the academic journal Political Theology 11.6 (2010) 826-845) "Muslim secularists" - or the subset within them of "Caliphate deniers", being those who profess a Muslim belief but consider that Islam has nothing to say about the State, that any conception … Continue reading The Caliphate Deniers
Historical precedence is not an evidence for permissibility. That it is not a source of Islamic ruling should be clear – if taken to its conclusion that would mean that we can point to the actions of some of the leaders historically to align themselves with groups hostile to the Muslims such as the crusaders or Mongols, or enforced hereditary rule, or other indiscretions of specific rulers which went unchecked, whether personal or otherwise – and suggest that they were also permitted since they took place. Such an argument is irresponsible, incorrect and contrary to Islamic thought.
Dr. Ovamir Anjum's recent piece for the Yaqeen Institute entitled "Who wants the Caliphate?" is certainly worth a read. It is a fairly substantial long-read for an internet article, so to summarise just a few of the points I found interesting; please note there is much more in the article than what I mention below, … Continue reading A Brief Response to Dr. Ovamir Anjum’s “Who Wants the Caliphate?”