Brothers A rahman, Nur, Mahdi

[islamicboy]

asalamulaikum brothers

I apologise for the delay in the response, i have been busy with the dawah. During the day i have responded to some questions on the personal forum but as i am at work it is difficult to respond to lenghty topic such as this.

Brothers i will start by showing you the evidences of the classical scholars about the leadership of islam whether you want to call him the imam, khalif, amir.

The following are the evidences to appoint one khalifah:


Appointing One Khalifah is an Obligation on all Muslims

The shar’iyah has made it an obligation on every Muslim to have a pledge of allegiance (bai’a) for a Khalifah; the obligation is to fulfill the pledge. Every Muslim should have a pledge on his neck, this can only be achieved if a Khalifah is appointed. The evidences of this principle is derived from the sunnah and the general consensus of the sahaba (ijma’a of the sahaba).

1. The Sunnah

Many ahadith confirm that Muslims are forbidden from having more than one state, and from having more than one ruler (amir) in the whole world. From these ahadith we extract the three following:

a. Al Imam Muslim reported on the authority of Abu Said Al Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (SAW) said: “When the oath of allegiance has been given for two Khalifs, kill the latter of them.”

b. Al Imam Muslim reported on the authority of Abdullah Ibnu Amru Ibnul-Ass that the Messenger of Allah (SAW) said: “Whoso pledges allegiance to an Imam, giving him the clasp of his hand and the fruit of his heart should obey him as long as he can, if another comes to dispute him, you must strike the neck of that man.”

c. Al Imam Bukhari, Al Imam Ibnu Maja, Al Imam Ahmed and Al Imam Muslim reported on the authority of Abu Hazim who said: “I accompanied Abu Hurayra for five years and heard him talking about the Prophet (SAW) saying: “the prophets ruled over the children of Israel. Whenever a prophet died, another prophet succeeded him, but there will be no prophet after me; there will be Khulafa’a and they will number many” They asked: What then do you command us? He (SAW) said: “Fulfill allegiance to them one after the other, give them their dues for verily Allah will make them accountable for what He entrusted them with”.

These three Sahih ahadith clearly indicate that Muslims are forbidden from having more than one Khalifah, or more than one State.

In addition to these three hadith, other hadith confirm that the Muslims are obliged to have an amir, i.e. one amir (ruler) no more, even if they were only three persons in isolation or on a journey.

Imam Ahmed reported on the authority of Abdullah Ibnu Amru that the Messenger of Allah (SAW) said: “It is forbidden for three persons to be together in a secluded place without appointing one of them as their amir”. (Sahih)

Al Imam Abu Dawood reported on the authority of Abu Said that the Messenger of Allah (SAW) said: “If three persons set off on a journey, they should appoint one of them as amir”. The phrase one of them implies that there should be no more than one amir. This carries the same weight in terms of evidence. The evidence cannot be cancelled out unless there is a text indication so: and there is no such text. So they should appoint one amir and no more.

Furthermore, if the shar’iyah verdict compells the appointment of an amir on three persons, this proves that the obligation on the ummah worldwide is of greater magnitude.

2. The General Consensus of the Sahaba
In the books of Al-Fasil-fi-l Milal by Ibnu Hazim, Tarikh of Al-Tabari, Al-A’kd Al-Farid of Al-Waqidi, Al-Sira of Ibnu Kathir, Al-sunan Al-Kubra of Bayhaqi and Siratu Ibn Hisham, that Al-Habbab Ibnu Munthir said when the Sahaba met in the wake of the death of the Messenger of Allah (SAW) at the saqifa (hall) of Bani Sa’ida: One Amir from us and one amir from you (meaning one from the Ansar and one from the Mohajireen). Upon this Abu Bakr replied: “It is forbidden for Muslims to have two Amirs (rulers)...” Then he got up and addressed the Muslims. And it has been reported in the Sirah of Ibnu Ishaq that Abu Bakr said on the day of Saqifa: “It is forbidden for muslims to have two amirs for this would cause differences in their affairs and concepts, their unity would be divided and disputes would break out amongst them. The sunnah would then be abandoned, the bida’a (innovations) would spread and the fitna would grow, and that is in no one’s interest”.

Therefore Abu Bakr delivered the shar’iyah verdict on the unity of the Khilafah, stressing that it is forbidden for the Muslim ummah to have more than one amir. The sahaba heard him and approved and consented, no one disputed the verdict, but submitted to it and accepted it as a law (indication of evidence from the sunnah). The Ansar then conceded their claim to Khilafah, and Al-Habbab Ibnu Munthir was the first to give his pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr (RA). The general consensus of the sahaba then took effect on the day of Al-Saqifa, that it is an obligation for all Muslims to have one ruler only. This opinion has been adopted by all the distinguished scholars here are the evidences:

Imam Ali (RA) in his book Nahj-ul-Balagha (part 1 page 91): “People must have an amir, either just, or a tyrant, where the believer works under his Imara (rule) and under which the unbeliever would also benefit, until his rule ended by the end of his life (ajal), the booty (fay’i) would be gathered, the enemy would be fought, the routes would be made safe, the strong one will return what he took from the weak till the tyrant would be contained, and would not bother anyone.

2. Al-Imam Al-Mawardi in his book Al Ahkam Al Sultaniyah page 9 says: “It is forbidden for the ummah to have two Imams at the same time”.

3. Al-Imam Al-Nawawi in his book Mughni Al-Muhtaj, volume 4, page 132 says: “It is forbidden to give an oath to two Imams or more, even in different parts of the world and even if they were far apart”.

4. Al-Imam Al-Qalqashandi in his book Subhul-Al-asha, volume 9, page 277 says: “It is forbidden to appoint two Imams at the same time”.

5. Al-Imam Ibnu Hazm in his book Al-Muhalla, volume 9, page 360 says: “It is permitted to have only one Imam in the whole of the world”.

6. Al-Imam Al-Sha’arani in his book Al-Mizan, volume 2, page 157 says: “It is forbidden for Muslims to hae in the whole world and at the same time two Imams whether in agreement or discord.”

7. Al-Imam Al-Qadhi Abdul-Jabbar in his book Al Mughni fi Abwab Al-Tawheed, volume 20, page 243, says: “It is forbidden to give the oath to more than one”.

8. Al-Imam Al-Tuftazi in his book Sharhul Aqa’id Al-Nasafiyah, page 185, says: “It is not allowed to appoint two independant Imams at the same time, abeying each one separately would result in the emerging of conflicting rules and laws.

9. Al-Imam Abu Ya’ala in his book Al Ahkam Al-Sultaniya, pages 9, and 25 says: “It is forbidden to contract two Imams at the same time”.

10. Al-Imam Al-Joziri in his book Al fiqh alal-Mathahib Al-Arba’a (the fiqh of the four schools of thought), volume 5, page 416 says: “The Imams (scholars of the four schools of thought) - may Allah have mercy on them - agree that the Imama is an obligation, and that the Muslims must appoint an Imam who would implement the deen’s rites, and give the oppressed justice against the oppressors. It is forbidden for Muslims to have two Imams in the world whether in agreement or in discord”.

The Shi’ite schools of thought and others have expressed the same opinion about this, if you want to explore this further brothers in detail can refer to the book of Al-Fasl Fil-Milal, volume 4, page 62, and the book of Matalib Ulil-Amr and the book of Maqalat Al-Islamyin, volume 2, page 134, or the Book of Al Moghni Fi Abuab Al-Tawhid, volume 20, pages 58-145.


I ask brothers where is this khalifah we should be giving baya to???

Why is it we are 52 different nations, when we should be united under the khilafah or the islamic state??? This is what rasulallh worked towards during his lifetime. This was established in medinah.

Brothers i would also like to add if you claim Iran to be an islamic state then are you brothers living under it??? and if not why not????

You have failed to provide me with the constituion for Iran being an islamic state???

You mentioned that Imam Khamemni is pious and brave, which i do not dispute. But what criteria must a khalif have to become a khalif. Is this the only criteria????

Brother mahdi mentionewd that it is allowed to be part of the united nations as a forum to propogate islam. You did not bring any evidence from quran and sunnah to validate such a claim.

Why doesn't imam khameni call the muslims of the world to give him the baya?? or is this just for shia muslims???

Why didn't the sahaba (ra) and the rightly guided kulafaa not wait for mahdi (a.s)??? They knew this hadith???


Brothers there are many other issues i would like to discuss. So insha allah i will give you my email and will discuss through this.


i haven't responded to all you questions brothers, but insha allah i will via email.

email - malik_25@hotmail.com


jazak allah khair

may allah gives us the victory of khilafah very soon insha allah.

[muhammad]

Salaam bro,

I have some questions regarding your interpretation:

You suggest that Imam Khamemni does not have sufficient qualities to be a caliph. Can you explain what he is lacking. Also do you know of someone with ALL the required qualities and what do we do if such a person does not exist?

Although I would like to see all Muslims unite there are many (so-called) Muslim leaders in this world, who given the caliphate would destory Islam. What happens if a caliph turns out to be anti-Islamic (hasn't this already happened in the history of Islam)?

Secondly, didn't many Muslims including non-Iranians, Sunni and Shia accept Imam Khomeini as a leader? (his fatwa against Salman Rushdie for example). He wasn't a leader of just Iranians at the time.

After the Prophets (PBUH) death there was much fighting such as the battle of the camel (mentioned in a previous thread). The Hadith you gave states that:
"When the oath of allegiance has been given for two Khalifs, kill the latter of them."

During these wars both armies must have had leaders who were opposing each other. Why did they not follow the Hadith and only have one leader?

Wassalaam,
Muhammad


[This message has been edited by muhammad (edited 18 October 2000).]

[islamicboy]

salaam brother mohammed


if you look at my question, then i am asking what is the criteria for a khalif, and who should appoint this khalif??


Bro insha allah i will be happy to meet you to discuss thses as well as other issues if you like. As it will be a live discussion we can explain things far better.


jazak allah

[mahdi]

bismil rabil noor,
assalamu alaikum,
br islamicboy, thanks for your effort but unfortunately you have not addressed my questions, instead repeated the hadiths on having one imam, khalif instead of two etc. this was not in any of my questions.
is it not you who is proposing khilafa?
you are proposing it and then asking who should be the khalif?
these were my questions.
is it logical that one proposes an idea by name(khilafa) and then ask others to fill in the details(contents)?
again i repeat some of the questions.
1- what qualities do you seek in a khalif or can anyone be a khalif?
2- how do you form khilafa?
3- how do we make sure that khilafa remains islamic and stop deviation?
4- what is your position towards the khilafa of yazid and all those corrupt khalifs later?
5- if the second claimant to khilafa should be beheaded, as suggested by the hadith you gave, what is the position towards moaweyaa?
6- was imam hussain right in fighting against the khalif yazid?why? what information, hadith, rule, ijtehad did he use to oppose yazid.? is this dalil avaiable today or has it been forgotten?
7- what will ensure that the khilafa will not become a tyrany and instead of unting muslms it fights them, like a tyrant, to submission. this is what happened at yazids time and at his fathers, moaweyya where forces of khalif, imam hassan a.s. were surrounded and were forced to submit to him? why are proponents unable to give a position towards the actions of moaweyya.
accordig to hadiths you quoted, all those who believe in such hadiths must consider moaweyya as someone who broke islamic rule and desserves to be beheaded. therefore, the appointment of yazid by him and all subsequent rullers, called khalifs, was against islam. can you give your position, explanation on this very important history which also give dalil for us.
8- why did the abbasaiyds rise against the ummayads? who was right and who was wrong?
the abbasaiyds claimed to be khalifs but they fought ummayads who also were khalifs???
I know that you will not be able to answer these questions. these have been put to hizbur tahrir in my previus discussions and the answer has always been null.
my point to you is, how can you follow a group that do not know where they stand?
it is the inability to answer these questions that forces many who initiallly are attracted to the slogans of khilafa to leave.
at the end of the day, promoters of the idea are saying, trust us, just come and let us make something and we call it khilafa and believe us it will be ok?
this attitude will not have serious supporters.
you claimed that to join UN was haram, therefore, what is your dalil? i do not need to give dalil as i am not the one who made it haram. any act is halal and ok unless it is made haram. to wear a yellow shirt with green dots is ok, i do not need to give dalil that it is, if someone says it is haram then they should give a dalil, evidence and reason.
if i was to say that we must join UN, it is fard etc like when you say about khilafa, then i would need to give dalil, evidence.

wasalam,
mahdi

[muhammad]

Originally posted by islamicboy:
salaam brother mohammed


if you look at my question, then i am asking what is the criteria for a khalif, and who should appoint this khalif??


Bro insha allah i will be happy to meet you to discuss thses as well as other issues if you like. As it will be a live discussion we can explain things far better.


jazak allah

Salaam IB and Mahdi,

To IB:

The questions asked by Mahdi seem reasonable to me, we cannot just appoint the first person that comes along as Caliph.

If you don't know what the criterian is for choosing a Caliph then how are we going to choose one? This needs to be discussed in detail. Please present us why your proposal based on the Qur'an and Hadiths (or Sunnah).

My email address is available if you want. However, I'm very busy most of the time so expect a slight delay in my responses.

Wassalaam,
Muhammad

[This message has been edited by muhammad (edited 18 October 2000).]

[Abdur_Rahman]

Salamun alikum brother IBoy

Brother you hav egone a great lenght to repeat the same thing with out answering any of the questions raised by mahdi or myself.

I put here a reply by mahdi to you (10th/Oct) asking for some answers, have you answered any of them??


bismil rabil nor,
assalamu alaikum,
br islamic boy, you have disproved your own points.
your inability to answer questions raised is shown by throwing up more
questions.
1-you are yet to tell us how you and hizbur tahrir plan to establish
khilafa
2-what is the quality sought in khalif and why was yazid a khalif,
saddam a would be khalif but imam khomeini not?
3-when do you give bay'a and when not
4-why was saddam, who has killed more muslims that any other kuffar
and is hated by muslims of iraq and brought so much misery to muslims
was loved by hizbur tahrir and they gave fatwas, again by non alem and
self proclaimed mujtahid, that muslims should declare jihad and side with
saddam in the last war.
5-what was the 'dalil' to say that we should side with one kafir-like
called saddam to fight another like king fahd?why did HT support the
invasion of kuwait, which led killing and raping of muslims?
6-since hizbur tahrir love the people of iraq were where they when the
kurds were gased by saddam? did they issue jihad?
7-according to hizbur tahrir it is the khalif who has authority over the
lives of muslims and umma therefore, in his absence how can you issue
fatwas on what is right and wrong, is that not the responsibility of the
khalif?
8-what is the position of hizbur tahrir with regards to palestinians
fighting for their land and quds?in the absence of a khalif what is the
dalil for doing jihad as they are doing? according to HT they should be
sitting and waiting for khalif then fight!!
9-why should iran and hizbullah help saddam, what is the dalil that says
help a criminal like saddam who promotes sale of alchohol, has
prostitution as free trade and used to supply his army with alchohol and
women in order to keep them fighting.
10-when you accuse iran of supporting sanction against iraq, what is
your evidence?
11-what is the dalil that we should not be part of UN, there are many
kufr institutions and UN is only one of them, does this fatwa extend to
all or just UN?why?
12-do kuffar have a right to take charge of peoples money or is that
the right of a khalif? if kuffar do not have this right then they do not
have a right to expend of it either, therefore the money given as
grants, social security, loans etc by kuffar is haram, in other words
they are, without authority giving peoples money to others? how do HT
leaders and muhajeroon leaders justify living on these monies?is it not
haram?
13-why are all HT leader free to call for the death of kuffar in the
middle of the land of kuffar but other muslims, namely hizbullah cannot
say hiss without being harassed?
14-the answer to your question ..
Where was the hezbuallah and the Iran when the Muslims in the Iraq
were massacred??
....they along with iraqi muslims were killing iraqi soldiers who were
serving the kafir-aided saddam.
15-your other question..
Did you also go to bosnia to fight jihad???
What about kosovo???
for sure hizbullah were present in all those cases. that is why if you go
to bosnia or kosovo you will see that the people have great respect for
hizbullah. the issue is not if i went to do jihad or not but if hizbur tahrir
would support such a jihad and the answer is NO they would not.

finally, it is rich getting those questions from you. it is you who in every
message is talking about khilafa and islamic state and not us.
as for the constition of iran, i am sure the same people who have given
you the other information can supply you with the constittion too. as
for it being islamic, it was endorsed by imam khomeini who was a marja,
grand ayatollah who devoted all is life to islam, if you ever find an alem
of his stature then you can ask for his opinion but please do not keep
using the opinion and fatwas issued by uneducated, social security
bread self-loving, big-talk no-action individuals like the heads of HT and
muhajerun as your measure of what is in accordance with sharia or not.

be humble and accept truth believe me you will feel lighter and more at
ease and you will never get embarasing question any more because you
will always have a logical answer ever after.
to show you how wrong your perception of islam is give me an answer
on this
was ima hussain right to rise against yazid, if yes then how do you add
your answer to the hadith you quoted, the one that says you behead
the challenger of a khalif. if the naswer is no the how would you explain
th ahadith the hussain is the youth of paradise.
you see if you followed islam like me, straight form ahlul bait and un
adultered you would not be embarrased by this question and have a
quick answer. buy as you do not follw the full version you will now get
into a twist trying to answer and evern more trying to justify you
answer.
there are many more questions that i hope you wil be prepared to
answer.
wasalam
mahdi

He has again asked you to give some answers!

[muhammad]

Salaam all,

Another point:

IB said that:
Why doesn't imam Khameni call the muslims of the world to give him the baya?? or is this just for shia muslims???

But surely when somebody (excluding a prophet who is commanded directly by Allah) asks people to give him baya it is a sign of arrogance and pride. So personally I wouldn't expect a good Muslim leader to ask people for baya - the true believers will follow him anyway.

Wassalaam,
Muhammad

[This message has been edited by muhammad (edited 18 October 2000).]