| Author | Topic |
aslammir
PAKISTAN
|
 Topic initiated on Tuesday, March 9, 2010 - 4:25 PM 
Establishment of khilafah?
salaams,
Is it the responsiblity of Muslims to establish Khilafat? |
|
safimera
CANADA
|
Posted - Wednesday, March 10, 2010 - 4:01 AM 
It is a long and complicated discussion but what I understrood from history and many authentic scholars.....Real khilafat (Administration point of view)) was only 40 yrs after RasoolAllah (PBUH), then there was only
kingdom or monarchy..
Our muslim historians just not to be embarassed in front of non muslims, tried to prove that omayed, abbassi and osmania khilafat were real "khilafat".
In reality it was totally wrong, the only truth that yes ! we got some pocket kings, in between, who ruled like real "khalifa", but very few.
So this is our history , now after 1400 yrs we could establish a khilafat is "dewanay ki dream". (by the way , it is my dream also, as I am also deewana). So almost impossible.
Now as human , yes! we are and we can live as khalifa of Allah in this world. |
|
StudyingIslamUK
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 10:08 AM
There are some Muslim scholars who think that each and every Muslim has been asked by Islam to strive to establish an Islamic state in case Islam does not reign supreme in the country he is living in.
It needs to be appreciated that Muslims are not required by their religion to fulfill any such obligation. Some religious scholars do present the example of the Prophet Muhammad (sws) and say that since he had established an Islamic state in Arabia, Muslims, wherever they are, should follow his example. In this regard, it is submitted that neither did the Prophet (sws) ever undertake the task of establishing an Islamic state nor was he ever directed by the Almighty to do so. The truth of the matter is that it is the Almighty Who according to His established practice regarding His Messengers took matters in His own hand in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (sws) and bestowed him and his nation the supremacy of Arabia.
Scholars who are of the opinion that Muhammad (sws) strove to establish an Islamic state in Arabia typically present the following verse in support of their view:
هُوَ الَّذِي أَرْسَلَ رَسُولَهُ بِالْهُدَى وَدِينِ الْحَقِّ لِيُظْهِرَهُ عَلَى الدِّينِ كُلِّهِ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْمُشْرِكُونَ(٩:٦١)
It is He Who has sent his Messenger [–Muhammad–] with Guidance and the Religion of Truth that he may proclaim it over all religions, even though the Idolaters may detest [this]. (61:9)
On the basis of the phrase “all religions”, it is understood that the followers of Islam must struggle for its dominance in their respective countries and territories.
An analysis of the context of this verse shows that it belongs to the class of directives that relate to the established practice of the Almighty regarding His Messengers (rusul) according to which a Messenger (rasul) always triumphs over his nation:
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يُحَادُّونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ أُوْلَئِكَ فِي الأَذَلِّينَ كَتَبَ اللَّهُ لَأَغْلِبَنَّ أَنَا وَرُسُلِي إِنَّ اللَّهَ قَوِيٌّ عَزِيزٌ(٥٨: ٢٠-١)
Indeed those who are opposing Allah and His Messenger are bound to be humiliated. The Almighty has ordained: “I and My Messengers shall always prevail.” Indeed, Allah is Mighty and Powerful. (58:20-1)
Muhammad (sws) was also informed that he would triumph over his nation. He and his Companions (rta) were told that they would have to fight the Idolaters of Arabia until the supremacy of Islam was achieved therein and that these Idolaters should be informed that if they did not desist from their evil ways they too would meet a fate no different from those of the other nations who denied their Messengers:
قُلْ لِلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا إِنْ يَنتَهُوا يُغْفَرْ لَهُمْ مَا قَدْ سَلَفَ وَإِنْ يَعُودُوا فَقَدْ مَضَتْ سُنَّةُ الْأَوَّلِينَ وَقَاتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّى لَا تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ وَيَكُونَ الدِّينُ كُلُّهُ لِلَّهِ (٨: ٣٨-٤٠)
Say to the Disbelievers that if they now desist [from disbelief] their past would be forgiven; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already [a warning for them]. And fight against them until there is no more persecution and prevails there the religion of God. (8:38-40)
Consequently, it is to be noted that the word al-mushrikun (the Idolaters) is used in 61:9 quoted above. The Qur’an uses this word specifically for the Idolaters of Arabia of the Prophet’s times. As a result, “all the religions” in the conjugate clause can only mean all the religions of Arabia at that time. So, the verse has no bearing on Muslims after the times of the Prophet (sws).
Therefore, striving to achieve the political supremacy of Islam is not any religious obligation of a Muslim, let alone waging jihad to achieve this supremacy. The verses from which this obligation has been construed specifically relate to the Prophet Muhammad (sws). |
|
aslammir
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Friday, March 12, 2010 - 8:09 AM
Thank u for ur replies!
Millions of Muslims all around the world have espoused the cause of the establishmentof khilafah.They contend that there should be only one Muslim khilafah in the world as it was in the times of the prophet(pbuh) and the four caliphs and subsequent ummayad and abassid eras.Are they right? |
|
StudentAffairs
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Monday, March 15, 2010 - 8:27 AM
Some people do present the following verse to contend that Islam has directed Muslims to politically unite:
إِنَّ هَذِهِ أُمَّتُكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَأَنَا رَبُّكُمْ فَاعْبُدُونِي (٢١: ٩٣)
Indeed, this ummah of yours is a single ummah, and I am your Lord and Cherisher. (21:93)
Some think that Islam directs all Muslims living in non-Muslim lands to unite under one leadership and present themselves as a single entity.
Nowhere has Islam directed Muslims living in a non-Muslim country to unite under one leadership. This may serve their interest and be very beneficial for them. However, they have not been bound by their religion in this regard. It is up to them if they want to adopt such a policy.
Some people do present the following verse to contend that Islam has directed Muslims to politically unite:
إِنَّ هَذِهِ أُمَّتُكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَأَنَا رَبُّكُمْ فَاعْبُدُونِي (٢١: ٩٣)
Indeed, this ummah of yours is a single ummah, and I am your Lord and Cherisher. (21:93)
If the context of this verse is deliberated upon, it comes to light that the Qur’an is not directing the present Muslim ummah to remain united; on the contrary the word ummah here is used for all the Prophets which are mentioned in the preceding verses (78-91). After enlisting most Prophets, the Qur’an says that all these Prophets are one ummah in the sense that they brought the same religion and it is the people who introduced innovations in it:
وَدَاوُودَ وَسُلَيْمَانَ إِذْ يَحْكُمَانِ فِي الْحَرْثِ إِذْ نَفَشَتْ فِيهِ غَنَمُ الْقَوْمِ وَكُنَّا لِحُكْمِهِمْ شَاهِدِينَ فَفَهَّمْنَاهَا سُلَيْمَانَ وَكُلًّا آتَيْنَا حُكْمًا وَعِلْمًا وَسَخَّرْنَا مَعَ دَاوُودَ الْجِبَالَ يُسَبِّحْنَ وَالطَّيْرَ وَكُنَّا فَاعِلِينَ وَعَلَّمْنَاهُ صَنْعَةَ لَبُوسٍ لَكُمْ لِتُحْصِنَكُمْ مِنْ بَأْسِكُمْ فَهَلْ أَنْتُمْ شَاكِرُونَ وَلِسُلَيْمَانَ الرِّيحَ عَاصِفَةً تَجْرِي بِأَمْرِهِ إِلَى الْأَرْضِ الَّتِي بَارَكْنَا فِيهَا وَكُنَّا بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَالِمِينَ وَمِنْ الشَّيَاطِينِ مَنْ يَغُوصُونَ لَهُ وَيَعْمَلُونَ عَمَلًا دُونَ ذَلِكَ وَكُنَّا لَهُمْ حَافِظِينَ وَأَيُّوبَ إِذْ نَادَى رَبَّهُ أَنِّي مَسَّنِي الضُّرُّ وَأَنْتَ أَرْحَمُ الرَّاحِمِينَ فَاسْتَجَبْنَا لَهُ فَكَشَفْنَا مَا بِهِ مِنْ ضُرٍّ وَآتَيْنَاهُ أَهْلَهُ وَمِثْلَهُمْ مَعَهُمْ رَحْمَةً مِنْ عِنْدِنَا وَذِكْرَى لِلْعَابِدِينَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِدْرِيسَ وَذَا الْكِفْلِ كُلٌّ مِنْ الصَّابِرِينَ وَأَدْخَلْنَاهُمْ فِي رَحْمَتِنَا إِنَّهُمْ مِنْ الصَّالِحِينَ وَذَا النُّونِ إِذْ ذَهَبَ مُغَاضِبًا فَظَنَّ أَنْ لَنْ نَقْدِرَ عَلَيْهِ فَنَادَى فِي الظُّلُمَاتِ أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا أَنْتَ سُبْحَانَكَ إِنِّي كُنتُ مِنْ الظَّالِمِينَ فَاسْتَجَبْنَا لَهُ وَنَجَّيْنَاهُ مِنْ الْغَمِّ وَكَذَلِكَ نُنْجِي الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَزَكَرِيَّا إِذْ نَادَى رَبَّهُ رَبِّ لَا تَذَرْنِي فَرْدًا وَأَنْتَ خَيْرُ الْوَارِثِينَ فَاسْتَجَبْنَا لَهُ وَوَهَبْنَا لَهُ يَحْيَى وَأَصْلَحْنَا لَهُ زَوْجَهُ إِنَّهُمْ كَانُوا يُسَارِعُونَ فِي الْخَيْرَاتِ وَيَدْعُونَنَا رَغَبًا وَرَهَبًا وَكَانُوا لَنَا خَاشِعِينَ وَالَّتِي أَحْصَنَتْ فَرْجَهَا فَنَفَخْنَا فِيهَا مِنْ رُوحِنَا وَجَعَلْنَاهَا وَابْنَهَا آيَةً لِلْعَالَمِينَ إِنَّ هَذِهِ أُمَّتُكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَأَنَا رَبُّكُمْ فَاعْبُدُونِي وَتَقَطَّعُوا أَمْرَهُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ كُلٌّ إِلَيْنَا رَاجِعُونَ (٢١ :٧٨-٩٣)
And remember David and Solomon, when they gave judgement in the matter of the field into which the sheep of certain people had strayed by night: we did witness their judgement. To Solomon We inspired the understanding of the matter: to each [of them] we gave judgement and knowledge; it was Our power that made the hills and the birds celebrate Our praises, with David: it was We who did [all these things]. It was We Who taught him the making of metal coats of mail for your benefit to guard you from each other’s violence. Will you then be grateful? [It was our power that made] the violent wind flow [tamely] for Solomon to his order to the land which We had blessed: for We do know all things. And of the evil ones, were some who dived for him, and did other work besides; and it was We who guarded them. And [remember] Job, when he cried to his Lord: “Truly distress has seized me, but You are the Most Merciful of those that are Merciful.” So We listened to him: We removed the distress that was on him, and We restored his people to him, and doubled their number, as a Grace from Ourselves, and a thing for commemoration for all who serve Us. And [remember] Isma‘il, Idris, and Dhu al-Kifl, all [men] of constancy and patience. We admitted them to our mercy, for they were of the righteous ones. And remember Dhu al-Nun, when he departed in wrath. He imagined that We would not call him to account! But he cried through the depths of darkness: “There is no god but You; glory to You. I was indeed wrong!” So We listened to Him and delivered him from distress and thus do We deliver those who have faith. And [remember] Zakariyyah, when he cried to his Lord: “O my Lord! Leave me not without offspring, though You are the best of inheritors.” So We listened to him and We granted him Yahya. We cured his wife’s [barrenness] for him. These were ever quick in emulation in good works; they used to call on Us with love and reverence, and humble themselves before Us. And [remember] her who guarded her chastity: we breathed into her of Our Spirit, and We made her and her son a sign for all peoples. Indeed, this ummah of yours is a single ummah, and I am your Lord and Cherisher: therefore serve Me [and no other]. But [the later generations] cut off their matter [of unity], one from another: [yet] will they all return to Us. (21:78-93) In other words, the words “Indeed, this ummah of yours is a single ummah” if interpreted keeping in view the context refers to the collectivity of the Prophets that came before Muhammad (sws). They have nothing to do with the Muslim ummah. For details check our our special issue on this topic of misconceptions at www.monthly-renaissance.com |
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 - 11:54 AM
Student affairs, you have very intelligently quoted some Verses of your choice to prove your point.
Allaah has commanded us to refer matters to His judgement and to establish Sharee‘ah, and He has forbidden us to rule with anything else, as is clear from a number of aayaat in the Qur’aan, such as the aayaat in Soorat al-Maa’idah (5) which discuss ruling according to what Allaah has revealed, and mention the following topics:
The command to rule according to what Allaah has revealed: quote:
“And so judge between them by what Allaah has revealed . . .” [aayah 49]
Warning against ruling by other than what Allaah has revealed: quote:
“. . . and follow not their vain desires . . .” [aayah 49]
Warning against compromising on any detail of Sharee‘ah, no matter how small: quote:
“. . . but beware of them lest they turn you far away from some of that which Allaah has sent down to you . . .” [aayah 49]
Forbidding seeking the ruling of jaahiliyyah, as is expressed in the rhetorical question quote:
“Do they then seek the judgement of (the Days of) Ignorance?” [aayah 50]
The statement that nobody is better than Allaah to judge: quote:
“. . . and who is better in judgement than Allaah for a people who have firm Faith?” [aayah 50]
The statement that whoever does not judge according to what Allaah revealed is a kaafir, a zaalim (oppressor or wrongdoer) and a faasiq (sinner), as Allaah says: quote:
“. . . And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the kaafiroon.” [aayah 44];
quote:
“. . . And whoever does not judge by that which Allaah has revealed, such are the zaalimoon (polytheists and wrongdoers)” [aayah 45];
quote:
“. . . And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed (then) such (people) are the faasiqoon (rebellious or disobedient).” [aayah 47].
The statement that it is obligatory for the Muslims to judge according to what Allaah has revealed, even if those who seek their judgement are not Muslim, as Allaah says: quote:
“. . . And if you judge, judge with justice between them. . .” [aayah 42]
Judging or ruling according to other than what Allaah has revealed is contrary to faith and Tawheed, which are Allaah’s rights. It may be counted as kufr akbar (greater kufr) or kufr asghar (lesser kufr) according to circumstances. Kufr akbar will make a person no longer a Muslim in cases such as the following:
If he issues laws and regulations other than those revealed by Allaah, because the right to issue laws belongs to Allaah alone, Who has no partner, and whoever “competes” with Him in a matter which is His alone is a mushrik, because Allaah says: quote:
“Or have they partners with Allaah (false gods), who have instituted for them a religion which Allaah has not allowed?” [al-Shooraa 42:21]
If the one who rules by other than that which Allaah has revealed denies the right of Allaah and His Prophet to rule, as is mentioned in Ibn ‘Abbaas’s comment on the aayah: quote:
“. . . And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the kaafiroon.” [al-Maa’idah 5:44].
Ibn ‘Abbaas said: quote:
“Whoever rejects what Allaah has revealed is a kaafir.”
If he prefers the rule of falsehood to the rule of Allaah, whether this is in absolute terms or just in a few matters. Allaah says: quote:
“Do they then seek the judgement of (the Days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allaah for a people who have firm Faith?” [al-Maa’idah 5:50]
If he regards the rule of Allaah and the rule of falsehood as equal. Allaah says: quote:
“. . . Then do not set up rivals unto Allaah (in worship) while you know (that He Alone has the right to be worshipped).” [al-Baqarah 2:22]
If he thinks that it is permissible to rule by something that contradicts the rule of Allaah and His Messenger, or he believes that it is not obligatory to rule according to what Allaah has revealed, or that the matter is optional. This is kufr which is contradictory to faith. Allaah revealed: quote:
“O Messenger! Let not those who hurry to fall into disbelief grieve you, of such who say: ‘We believe’ with their mouths but their hearts have no faith. And of the Jews are men who listen much and eagerly to lies - listen to others who have not come to you; they say, ‘If you are given this, take it, but if you are not given this, then beware!’ . . .” [al-Maa’idah 5:41].
He says: quote:
“Go to Muhammad (peace be upon him), and if he tells you that the ruling is lashes, accept it, but if he commands stoning, ignore what he says. Then Allaah revealed
quote:
“. . . And whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the kaafiroon (disbelievers)” [al-Maa’idah 5:44].
If he does not rule according to what Allah has revealed out of stubbornness and arrogance, he is a kaafir and has left Islaam, even if he does not deny the rule of Allaah. Stubbornness and arrogance may mean negligence and turning away, as Allaah says: quote:
“Have you seen those (hypocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taaghoot (false judges, etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaytaan wishes to lead them astray. And when it is said to them: ‘Come to what Allaah has sent down and to the Messenger,’ see they hypocrites turn away from you (Muhammad) with aversion.” [al-Nisaa’ 4:60-61]
Among the things that may be counted as ruling by other than that which Allaah revealed and kufr akbar is what Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem said about man-made laws and ruling by them: quote:
“This is the worst, the most obvious and comprehensive opposition to sharee‘ah and rejection of Allaah’s laws. This is competing with Allaah and His Messenger, contradicting His laws in their preparation, support, structure, ruling and references.
The above is a summary of the things that may imply that ruling by other than that which Allah has revealed is a form of shirk akbar (major shirk):
(1) Ruling by other than that which Allaah has revealed.
(2) Denying the right of Allaah and His Messenger to rule.
(3) Preferring the rule of falsehood to the rule of Allaah, whether this is complete or only in a few matters.
(4) Regarding the rule of Allaah and the rule of falsehood as equal.
(5) Thinking that it is permissible to rule by something that contradicts what Allaah has revealed, or believing that ruling by what Allaah has revealed is not obligatory or is optional.
(6) Refusing to rule by what Allaah has revealed.
By examining this topic from different angles, it becomes clear that what is counted as kufr akbar is the following:
Abolishing sharee‘ah as the law governing a country, as Mustafa Kemal (“Ataturk”) did in Turkey, as he abolished the book Majallah al-Ahkaam al-‘Adliyyah which was based on the Hanafi madhhab, and replaced it with man-made laws.
Abolishing sharee‘ah courts.
Imposing man-made laws, such as Italian, French, German law, etc., to judge between the people, or mixing these laws and Sharee‘ah, as Genghis Khan did in his book al-Yaasiq, which combined laws from different sources; the ‘ulamaa’ (scholars) ruled that he was a kaafir.
Confining the role of sharee‘ah courts to so-called “civil” matters, such as marriage, divorce and inheritance.
Setting up non-sharee‘ah courts.
Discussing sharee‘ah in parliament and voting on it; this indicates that implementing sharee‘ah is conditional upon a majority vote.
Making sharee‘ah a secondary or main source, along with other sources of law. Even when they say that sharee‘ah is the primary source of legislation, this is still kufr akbar, because it means that they are allowing the adoption of laws from other sources too.
Stating in the clauses of legislation that reference may be made to international law, or stating in treaties that in the case of dispute, the matter may be referred to such-and-such non-Islamic court.
Criticizing sharee‘ah in public or in private, such as saying that it is rigid, incomplete or backward, or suggesting that it is incompatible with our times, or expressing admiration for non-Islamic laws.[/pre]
As regards the question of when ruling by other than what Allaah revealed is kufr asghar, which does not exclude a person from the ummah of Islam:
[pre]the answer is that this may be the case when a ruler or judge passes judgement according to other than what Allaah revealed out of disobedience or on a whim, or as a favour to someone, or because he was bribed, and so on, although he believes that it is obligatory to judge according to what Allaah has revealed, and that what he has done is a sinful and haraam deed.
As regards the one who is governed by a non-Islamic law, if he refers to it out of choice, then he is a kaafir whose kufr akbar means that he has left Islaam. But if he has no choice but to refer to this law, and does so reluctantly, then he is not a kaafir, because if he had been able to resort to sharee‘ah, he would have done so, and he believes that this non-Islamic law is false. |
|
safimera
CANADA
|
Posted - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 - 6:19 PM
aboosait!!!
salam
what I understood that u r in favour of TRYING to establish islamic or khilafat state.....
or u think it is must for muslims to have it.....
I think what student affair said saying is not against all your references u gave above....
but it is against your interpretation from these verses and references.
Islamic shariaya is necessary for all muslim..but islamic state is not necessary for that.....
every muslim has to follow islamic shariaya in his/her capacity....
yes! there could be possiblity that if sometimes when most of the people live together in peace , they can make a islamic shariaya govt . as well....
Secondly
Almost all rulers of Abssid, ummayed and osmania were a shame for islamic shariya....u should read the history..they were oppressors, their royal family members were above the law and
wines and adultary, in the name of slave girls, were common among rulers...they wer killing,putting in jail or giving lashes punishment to almost all big scholars of muslims...
It is the common muslims and great scholars [/b] who kept the society a little islamic...
I do not understand that why present muslims are proud of umayed, abassid or osmania khilafat......
we should be proud of those great scholars who went to jail at that time and some got killed and got lashes for their truth and
their courage kept common muslims continue their shariya...
My friend there was no Govt of real islamic shariya after first 4 caliphs in islamic history.....
muslims themselves, with the help of great and poius scholars, kept their shariya alive in their life.... |
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Thursday, March 18, 2010 - 3:00 AM
quote:
establish islamic or khilafat state.....
There is difference between the two (islamic State vs. khilafat state) and I mean an Islamic state.
I say this based on the following hadith reported by at-Tirmizi on the authority of Safeenah who said that the Messenger (saw) said: quote:
“The Khilafah in my Ummah after me will be for thirty years. Then there will be Mulkan ‘aduudan (hereditary rule) after that.”
[Similar narrations are also to be found in the Sunan of Abu Dawud (2/264) and Musnad of Ahmad (1/169)]quote:
I think what student affair said saying is not against all your references u gave above....
How could it be against the Verses when he has not quoted the relevant Verses at all.quote:
but it is against your interpretation from these verses and references.
Do you interpret the Verses to mean differently?quote:
Almost all rulers of A, u and O were a shame for islamic shariya....
You cant blame the Shari'ah for that. Shari'ah does not advocate tyranny and oppression!
quote:
It is the common muslims and great scholars who kept the society a little islamic...
They should have tried harder to make it fully Islamic. quote:
we should be proud of those great scholars who went to jail at that time and some got killed and got lashes for their truth and their courage kept common muslims continue their shariya...
If only the common muslims too had joined hands with the scholars and revolted against the tyranny!quote:
muslims themselves, with the help of great and poius scholars, kept their shariya alive in their life....
How do you say that (shariya alive in their life.) when they have not placed those scholars above the tyrants? Does the Shari'ah allow you to suffer tyranny and oppression?
Edited by: aboosait on Thursday, March 18, 2010 2:57 PM |
|
shehzads
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Thursday, March 18, 2010 - 5:14 PM
| Aboosait you have tried hard to give reasons but the problem with your understanding remains the same i.e. you are not marrying the verses with the context. We can reach nowhere with this type of approach towards the understanding of Qur'an. If you look at the explanation given by Students affairs, all the references are explained in their context, hence the conclusion is easy to understand and appeals to one's common sense. What do you think? |
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Friday, March 19, 2010 - 11:15 AM
quote:
Aboosait .......... What do you think?
Shehzads, Please first answer the questions I had asked in my previous post.
quote:
If you look at the explanation given by Students affairs, all the references are explained in their context,
Sure, but (as I have already told you), the references (verses) selected by student affairs are themselves off topic. Please check with the Verses (references) quoted by me. They talk of the subject under discussion namely ruling according to laws laid down by Allah and the Prophet (shari'ah).
In answer to another question that would naturally arise at this juncture - whether Khilafa is also necessary, I have quoted the Hadith where the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam has stated that khilafah will be only for 30 years.
Edited by: aboosait on Friday, March 19, 2010 11:22 AM |
|
hkhan
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Friday, March 19, 2010 - 7:39 PM
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Saturday, March 20, 2010 - 7:13 PM
quote:
uncle aboosait; ur research luks worth a dialogue  ~do send it to our 'cross comments' section to "renaissance journal" <ren@monthly-renaissance.com>, 'coz the article is available there
www.monthly-renaissance.com
I would rather welcome an open dialogue in this forum if the forum rules permit. |
|
hkhan
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Monday, March 22, 2010 - 6:40 PM
| hmm...sure why not; if u can attract participants interested in this topic to further the discussion with u |
|
aslammir
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 9:05 AM
I would suggest that we restart the discussion and don,t let ourselves digress from the main topic.
I would like to know that where does the Quran or any authentic hadith expressly command Mulims to struggle or mount a movement for the establishment or restoration of Khilafat as many Muslim leaders in the past and present propound and following them millions of Muslims have espoused this cause. |
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Tuesday, March 23, 2010 - 6:44 PM
quote:
...... I would like to know that where does the Quran or any authentic hadith expressly command Mulims to struggle or mount a movement for the establishment or restoration of Khilafat ..........
I have quoted the Hadith where the Prophet Sallallahu alaihi wasallam has stated that khilafah will be only for 30 years. He (Sallallahu 'alaihi wasallam) was not joking. |
|
samra
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Thursday, March 25, 2010 - 10:48 PM
| So those 30 years are over then? Aren't they? |
|
 Reply to Topic 
Printer Friendly |
| Jump To: |
|
|
|