The Khilafah Is Not A Utopia But A Shariah Rule

 

Many degenerates who are part of the criminal secular camp who seek to cause fitna amongst the Muslim masses and deviate the masses from their sincere desire for the resumption of Islam seek to highlight the nonutopian nature of the Khilafah to call people to the gates of hell, by exhorting them to not respond to the command of Allah(swt).

The fact of the matter is that any state run by humans will have mis-implementation as humans are fallible and prone to error. This point is mutually exclusive from the obligatory nature of the command of the Khilafah.

The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “The Khilafah after me is thirty years, then there will be biting kingship”

This hadeeth has been related by Imaam Ahmad in al-Musnad, al-Haakim in al-Mustadrak, Abu Ya’laa in al-Musnad, Ibn Hibbaan in his Saheeh and at-Tirmidhee in as-Sunan.

A verb in the Arabic language requires a noun, thus the verb تكون has الخلافة(Khilafah) as its noun. Therefore the hadith is saying the Khilafah itself will become a ملكا عضوضا (biting kingship). There is no indication to say the Khilafah will come to an end after thirty years. Therefore the only translation supported by the rules of Arabic grammar is the Khilafah itself will turn into a biting kingship, not that the Khilafah will come to an end and be replaced by a biting kingship.

The erudite Shafi Sayf ad-Deen al-Aamidi mentioned exactly the same point in regards to another variation of the narration when he said: ”then it will become (Taseer) a mulkan”. The personal pronoun (dameer) in “taseeru milkan” refers to the Khilafah. Since the mentioned (verb) cannot refer to anything other than the Khilafah, as if it is saying “and then the Khilafah becomes a mulk” It judged that the Khilafah will become a mulk, the judgment on a thing requires that the thing itself exists.’ He added: ‘It is like saying “and then Tariq became angry” the transforming of Tariq to a state of anger does not mean Tariq has become Ali or Umar. He is still Tariq but an aspect of his state has changed which is that he has become angry. Similarly when the hadith says “thumma taseeru mulkan (and then it became a hereditary rule)” it does not mean it ceases to be a Khilafah.

There is not one traditionalist these secular self styled scholars will present who held the opinion the Khilafah came to an end after thirty years. Rather they accuse the sahabah of collectively disobeying Allah after the death of Ali(ra) by insinuating the companions gave up on ruling by Islam after the martyrdom of Ali(ra).

The legal aspects of Islam which includes the implementation of the solutions of Islam and their methodology alongside the Islamic belief are not worldy matters that “you know the best about”. This is clear in the book of Allah(swt):

“And judge, between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations and beware of them, lest they tempt you away from some of what Allah has revealed to you. And if they turn away – then know that Allah only intends to afflict them with some of their [own] sins. And indeed, many among the people are defiantly disobedient. Then is it the judgement of [the time of] ignorance they desire? But who is better than Allah in judgement for a people who are certain [in faith].”(TMQ 5:49-50)

To insinuate the rule came to an end after thirty years is to mis represent the hadith of Rasul Allah(saw) and to accuse the companions of turning their back on the command of the Quran to rule exclusively by Islam, we seek refuge in Allah(swt) from such nonsense.

We do not deny that there were times when more than one claimant to the Khilafah existed but this did not alter the shariah rule commanding singularity of rulership. Likewise we do not deny that the rulers were fallible and made mistakes as individuals whether that was innovating certain practices like getting the notables to swear fealty to a relative before they passed away or their attempt of imposing theological opinions on the masses.

In the same breath we would like to highlight that the same rulers who mis applied certain rules were met with scholars who attempted to correct them but never took their hand away from allegiance to them. Thus to compare the Ummayads, Abbasids or Uthamnis to the secularists of the nation states is intentional distortion. One party had some individuals who may have had personal deficiencies but still implemented the Islamic systems whilst the current rulers implement kufr even though some of them may have memorised the Quran. The tyrannical Khalifah is better than the secular memoriser of the Quran.

We are not communists hungry for bread and calling for Khilafah for expediency. The rule by Islam is a command of Allah(swt) till yaum ul qiyamah. So dear brothers keep moving forward in calling for that which He(swt) has commanded and do not fear the blame and accusations of the heretical opportunists who seek to prolong your colonisation.

“He whom death overtakes while he is engaged in acquiring knowledge with a view to reviving Islam with the help of it, there will be one degree between him and the Prophets in Paradise.” [Al-Tirmidhi Hadith no. 249. Narrated by Al-Hasan al-Basri]

This article originated on https://mudassarhussainblog.wordpress.com/2017/09/10/the-khilafah-is-not-a-utopia-but-a-shariah-rule/

Share this:

Mudassar Hussain

https://mudassarhussainblog.wordpress.com/

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.