[UtidaBrar]

Khilafah is not "monarchy system of governance".

Khilafah is based upon the method of the Prophethood, hence should resemble the first four caliphs in Islam.

Allah Knows Best.

Sorry, Im a little confused with your posting above regarding the "monarchy system of governace".

Are you saying that in Islam, there is no such thing as "monarchy system" ?

Note, I did not say that Khilafah == monarchy system.
I quote what I wrote...
...monarchy system of governing is a part of Islamic governance that Rasulullah s.a.w. has approved. In other words, monarchy system is a unit from the khalifatul ummah system. It is difficult for me to explain if I do not know exactly which part that you do not understand (or disagree or need clarifying).

[P1international]

Could you cite scholars from the remaining 1200years who said khilafah should be established in this manner and the existing systems after the 4 caliphs should be fought and replaced ?

And to the larger issue, does quran and sunnah anywhere associate the problems of Muslim ummah in the end times with the absence of khilafah? I'm not against it, but I'm not sure if it has to be one of priority in the way some people give it. I have seen narrations that associate the problems of muslim ummah with fear of death and increase desire of the world; but nothing regarding the khilafah.

THE OBLIGATORY CHARACTER OF THE CALIPHATE
025.1 (Mawardi) The reason the office of supreme leadership has been established in Sacred Law is to fulfill the caliphal successorship to prophethood in preserving the religion and managing this-worldly affairs. The investiture of someone from the Islamic Community (Umma) able to fulfill the duties of the caliphate is obligatory by scholarly consensus (def: b7), though scholars differ as to whether its obligatory character is established through reason or through Revealed Law. Some say that it is obligatory by human reason, because of the agreement of rational individuals to have a leader to prevent them from wronging one another and to come between them when conflict and arguments arise. Without authorities, there would be a chaos of neglected people and a disorderly mob. Others hold that it is obligatory not through reason, but rather through Sacred Law, for the caliph performs functions that human reason might not otherwise deem ethically imperative, and which are not entailed by reason alone, for reason merely requires that rational beings refrain from reciprocal oppression and strife, such that each individual conform with the demands of fairness in behaving towards others with justice and social cohesion, each evaluating their course with their own mind, not anyone else 's, whereas Sacred Law stipulates that human concerns be consigned to the person religiously responsible for them. Allah Mighty and Majestic says,
"You who believe, obey Allah and obey the Prophet and those of authority among you" (Koran 4:59),
thereby obliging us to obey those in command. namely the leader with authority over us.

Abu Hurayra relates that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said. "Leaders shall rule you after me, the godfearing of them ruling you with godfearingness and the . profligate ruling you with wickedness. So listen to them and obey them in everything that is right; for if they do well, it will count for you and for them, and if they do badly. it will count for you and against them."

(al-Ahkam al-sultaniyya wa al-wilayat al-diniyya ,5-6)
-Reliance of a Traveller.

Also Ibn Hajar Haytami (ra) mentions in the commentary on Imam Nawawi's Minhaj al-talibin:
" The caliphate is a communal obligation (Fardh Kifaaya) just as the judgeship is."

'Abd ai-Hamid Sharwani (ra) further gives the reason as:
"... because the Islamic community needs a ruler to uphold the religion, defend the sunna, succor the oppressed from oppressors, fulfill rights, and restore them to whom they belong"

[XarokLasa]

THE OBLIGATORY CHARACTER OF THE CALIPHATE
025.1 (Mawardi) The reason the office of supreme leadership has been established in Sacred Law is to fulfill the caliphal successorship to prophethood in preserving the religion and managing this-worldly affairs. The investiture of someone from the Islamic Community (Umma) able to fulfill the duties of the caliphate is obligatory by scholarly consensus (def: b7), though scholars differ as to whether its obligatory character is established through reason or through Revealed Law. Some say that it is obligatory by human reason, because of the agreement of rational individuals to have a leader to prevent them from wronging one another and to come between them when conflict and arguments arise. Without authorities, there would be a chaos of neglected people and a disorderly mob. Others hold that it is obligatory not through reason, but rather through Sacred Law, for the caliph performs functions that human reason might not otherwise deem ethically imperative, and which are not entailed by reason alone, for reason merely requires that rational beings refrain from reciprocal oppression and strife, such that each individual conform with the demands of fairness in behaving towards others with justice and social cohesion, each evaluating their course with their own mind, not anyone else 's, whereas Sacred Law stipulates that human concerns be consigned to the person religiously responsible for them. Allah Mighty and Majestic says,
"You who believe, obey Allah and obey the Prophet and those of authority among you" (Koran 4:59),
thereby obliging us to obey those in command. namely the leader with authority over us.

Abu Hurayra relates that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said. "Leaders shall rule you after me, the godfearing of them ruling you with godfearingness and the . profligate ruling you with wickedness. So listen to them and obey them in everything that is right; for if they do well, it will count for you and for them, and if they do badly. it will count for you and against them."

(al-Ahkam al-sultaniyya wa al-wilayat al-diniyya ,5-6)
-Reliance of a Traveller.

Also Ibn Hajar Haytami (ra) mentions in the commentary on Imam Nawawi's Minhaj al-talibin:
" The caliphate is a communal obligation (Fardh Kifaaya) just as the judgeship is."

'Abd ai-Hamid Sharwani (ra) further gives the reason as:
"... because the Islamic community needs a ruler to uphold the religion, defend the sunna, succor the oppressed from oppressors, fulfill rights, and restore them to whom they belong"

Thanks. Important points made in the quotes.

Do they also discuss the fard conditions for a legitimate and a illegitimate caliphate/ruler ?

[P1international]

Thanks. Important points made in the quotes.

Do they also discuss the fard conditions for a legitimate and a illegitimate caliphate/ruler ?

Reliance of the traveller:
What follows has been edited from al-Ahkam al-sultaniyya wa alwilayat al-diniyya by Imam Abul Hasan Mawardi, together with three principal commentaries on Imam Nawawi's Minhaj al-talibin, extracts from which are indicated by parentheses and the initial of the commentator, Ibn Hajar Haytami (H: ), Muhammad Shirbini Khatib (K: ), or 'Abd ai-Hamid Sharwani (S: ).


THE QUALIFICATIONS OF A CALIPH

O25.3 (Nawawi: ) among the qualifications of the caliph are that he be:
(a) Muslim (H: so that he may see to the best interests of Islam and the Muslims (K: it being invalid to appoint a non-Muslims (K: it being invalid to appoint a non-Muslim (kafir) to authority, even to rule non-Muslim.)

(S: Qadi 'lyad states that there is scholarly consensus that it is not legally valid to invest a non-Muslim as caliph,
and that if a caliph becomes a non-Muslim he is not longer caliph,
as also when he does not maintain the prescribed prayers
(A: meaning to both perform them himself and order Muslim to)
and summon the people to them, and likewise (according to the majority of scholars)
if he makes reprehensible innovations (bid'a) (A: by imposing an innovation on people that is Offensive or unlawful).
If the caliph becomes a non-Muslim, alters the Sacred Law-
(N: such alteration being of two types,
one of which consists of his changing the Law by legislating
something which contravenes it while believing in the validity of the provisions of the Sacred Law, this
being an injustice that does not permit rebellion against him, while the other consists of imposing rules
that contravenes the provisions of the religion while believing in the validity of the rules he has imposed,
this being unbelief (kufr) (A: it is questionable whether anyone would impose much rules without
believing in their validity))
or imposes reprehensible innovations while in office, then he loses his
authority and need no longer be obeyed, and it is obligatory for Muslims to rise against him if possible,
remove him from office, and install an upright leader in his place. If only some are able, they are obliged
to rise up and remove the unbeliever (A: whether they believe they will succeed or fail), through it is not
obligatory to try to remove a leader who imposes reprehensible innovations unless they believe it
possible. If they are certain that they are unable to (A: remove an innovator), they are not obliged to rise
against him. Rather, a Muslim in such a case should emigrate from his country (N: if he can find a better one),
fleeing with his religion (A: which is obligatory if he is prevented in his home country from openly
performing acts of worship)));

(b) possessd to legal responsibility (K: so as to command the people, it being invalid for a child or insane-person to lead):

(c) free (K: so that others may consider him competent and worthy or respect)

(d) male (K: to be able to devote himself fulltime to the task, and to mix with men, the leadership of a woman being invalid because of the rigorously authenticated (sahih) hadith.
"A people that leave its leadership to a woman will never succeed"):

(e) of the Quraysh tribe (K: because of the (H: well-authenticated (hasan)) hadith related by Nasa'i.
"The Imams are of the Quraysh."
a hadith adhered to by the Companions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and those
after them, this qualification being obligatory when there is a member of Quraysh available who meets
the other conditions) (H: though when there is not , then the next most eligible is a qualified member of
the Kinana tribe, then of the Arabs, then of the non-Arabs);

(f) capable of expert legal reasoning (ijtihad) (H: as a judge must be ) and with even
greater need (K: so as to know the rulings of Sacred Law, teach people, and not need to seek the legal
opinion of others concerning uprecedented events), scholarly consensus having been related
concerning this condition, which is not contradicted by the statement of the Qadi (A: 'Iyad) that "an
ignorant upright person is fitter than a knowledgeable corrupt one," since the former would be able to
refer matters requiring expert legal reasoning to qualified scholars, and moreover the remark applies to
when the available leaders are not capable of legal reasoning (S: while possessing the other qualifications
for leadership));

(g) courageous (K: meaning undaunted by danger, that he may stand alone, direct troops, and vanquish foes);

(h) possessed of discernment (H: in order to lead followers and see to their best interests, religious or
this-worldly discernment meaning at minimum to know the various capacities of people), sound hearing
and eyesight, and the faculty of speech (K: so as to decisively arbitrate matters);

(i) and be upright as a judge must be, and with even greater need. But it is valid, if
forced to, to resor to the leadership of a corrupt person, which is why Ibn 'Abd al-Salam says, "If there
are no upright leaders or rules available, then the least corrupt is given precedence".

[XarokLasa]

Reliance of the traveller:
What follows has been edited from al-Ahkam al-sultaniyya wa alwilayat al-diniyya by Imam Abul Hasan Mawardi, together with three principal commentaries on Imam Nawawi's Minhaj al-talibin, extracts from which are indicated by parentheses and the initial of the commentator, Ibn Hajar Haytami (H: ), Muhammad Shirbini Khatib (K: ), or 'Abd ai-Hamid Sharwani (S: ).


THE QUALIFICATIONS OF A CALIPH

O25.3 (Nawawi: ) among the qualifications of the caliph are that he be:
(a) Muslim (H: so that he may see to the best interests of Islam and the Muslims (K: it being invalid to appoint a non-Muslims (K: it being invalid to appoint a non-Muslim (kafir) to authority, even to rule non-Muslim.)

(S: Qadi 'lyad states that there is scholarly consensus that it is not legally valid to invest a non-Muslim as caliph,
and that if a caliph becomes a non-Muslim he is not longer caliph,
as also when he does not maintain the prescribed prayers
(A: meaning to both perform them himself and order Muslim to)
and summon the people to them, and likewise (according to the majority of scholars)
if he makes reprehensible innovations (bid'a) (A: by imposing an innovation on people that is Offensive or unlawful).
If the caliph becomes a non-Muslim, alters the Sacred Law-
(N: such alteration being of two types,
one of which consists of his changing the Law by legislating
something which contravenes it while believing in the validity of the provisions of the Sacred Law, this
being an injustice that does not permit rebellion against him, while the other consists of imposing rules
that contravenes the provisions of the religion while believing in the validity of the rules he has imposed,
this being unbelief (kufr) (A: it is questionable whether anyone would impose much rules without
believing in their validity))
or imposes reprehensible innovations while in office, then he loses his
authority and need no longer be obeyed, and it is obligatory for Muslims to rise against him if possible,
remove him from office, and install an upright leader in his place. If only some are able, they are obliged
to rise up and remove the unbeliever (A: whether they believe they will succeed or fail), through it is not
obligatory to try to remove a leader who imposes reprehensible innovations unless they believe it
possible. If they are certain that they are unable to (A: remove an innovator), they are not obliged to rise
against him. Rather, a Muslim in such a case should emigrate from his country (N: if he can find a better one),
fleeing with his religion (A: which is obligatory if he is prevented in his home country from openly
performing acts of worship)));

(b) possessd to legal responsibility (K: so as to command the people, it being invalid for a child or insane-person to lead):

(c) free (K: so that others may consider him competent and worthy or respect)

(d) male (K: to be able to devote himself fulltime to the task, and to mix with men, the leadership of a woman being invalid because of the rigorously authenticated (sahih) hadith.
"A people that leave its leadership to a woman will never succeed"):

(e) of the Quraysh tribe (K: because of the (H: well-authenticated (hasan)) hadith related by Nasa'i.
"The Imams are of the Quraysh."
a hadith adhered to by the Companions of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and those
after them, this qualification being obligatory when there is a member of Quraysh available who meets
the other conditions) (H: though when there is not , then the next most eligible is a qualified member of
the Kinana tribe, then of the Arabs, then of the non-Arabs);

(f) capable of expert legal reasoning (ijtihad) (H: as a judge must be ) and with even
greater need (K: so as to know the rulings of Sacred Law, teach people, and not need to seek the legal
opinion of others concerning uprecedented events), scholarly consensus having been related
concerning this condition, which is not contradicted by the statement of the Qadi (A: 'Iyad) that "an
ignorant upright person is fitter than a knowledgeable corrupt one," since the former would be able to
refer matters requiring expert legal reasoning to qualified scholars, and moreover the remark applies to
when the available leaders are not capable of legal reasoning (S: while possessing the other qualifications
for leadership));

(g) courageous (K: meaning undaunted by danger, that he may stand alone, direct troops, and vanquish foes);

(h) possessed of discernment (H: in order to lead followers and see to their best interests, religious or
this-worldly discernment meaning at minimum to know the various capacities of people), sound hearing
and eyesight, and the faculty of speech (K: so as to decisively arbitrate matters);

(i) and be upright as a judge must be, and with even greater need. But it is valid, if
forced to, to resor to the leadership of a corrupt person, which is why Ibn 'Abd al-Salam says, "If there
are no upright leaders or rules available, then the least corrupt is given precedence".

Thanks. It seems that the rebellion is permitted only in the case of first qualification. And the rebellion in first qualification has also been conditioned with depending upon "capability" of success.

[pMJWFoAWD]

I think we are looking it at the wrong way. Khilafat doesn't have to arise from each of the places ruled by the kuffar. Especially since there is no multiple khilafath allowed. What could happen are:
- an Ameerul Mumineen to emerge from a Muslim dominated region, in the current situation most likely Afghanistan. Allah knows best.
- When the Khalifa establishes Shariah in the land and has the bayah of the resident Muslims of that country,
- the rest of the Muslim countries may choose to give Bayah. Which seems to be highly unlikely in todays situation.
- Many Muslms can do Hijra to be under the rule of Ameerul Mumineen. May Allah Ta'ala make it easy for us.
- Then like the Sahaba did as per the order of Rasoolullah the Khalifa can offer three options to the rest of the Non-Muslims: Islam, Jizya, Sword. I understand this is how Ghazwat ul Hind will be coming .



This is a very important point. May Allah Ta'ala give all of us a sound heart. ameen.

IMO, if the Muslim countries or their rulers refuse to give bayah for no legitimate reason, they ought to be fought because they would be standing in the way of an Islamic duty. But, at the same time, it's haram to kill Muslims. Maybe attacking with sleeping gas (I'm serious) or imprisoning them all would be a solution. wallahu a'lam

[sniskelsowwef]

IMO, if the Muslim countries or their rulers refuse to give bayah for no legitimate reason, they ought to be fought because they would be standing in the way of an Islamic duty. But, at the same time, it's haram to kill Muslims. Maybe attacking with sleeping gas (I'm serious) or imprisoning them all would be a solution. wallahu a'lam

that would require large prisons