Comments on: Thoughts on Islam’s Political System

By: I need help with Islam - Grasscity.com Forums

I need help with Islam - Grasscity.com Forums — Fri, 14 Sep 2012 14:42:08 +0000

[…] […]

By: Thoughts on Islam’s Political System | لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله

Thoughts on Islam’s Political System | لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 04:04:28 +0000

[…] Dr. Ahmed Al-Raissouni at Suhaibwebb.com | Translated, with slight modifications, by Suha Abu […]

By: Hasan

Hasan — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 03:20:59 +0000

In reply to Tarik.

Salaam,

Tarik Said:

“We must be clear that Islam has its own unique political system which is not compatible with any other system. the source of our worship and political rules must be ISLAM and ONLY ISLAM.”

Can you please specify what that political system is, how leaders and their successors are chosen, and how you are interpreting Islam (which does have flexible methodology thus making it applicable for all times).

By: Malik Khatib

Malik Khatib — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 22:59:03 +0000

salaam,

Sh. Suhaib, by posting this article, are you I’m agreement with it?

Do you believe that having a single imam under Islamic rule is not a long term goal for the ummah?

wa-salaam,
Malik

By: Asim K

Asim K — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 20:55:51 +0000

JazakAllah for the translation. Can the editors please leave a short bio of who exactly the author is somewhere, even one line?

By: Thoughts on Islam

Thoughts on Islam — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 20:46:22 +0000

[…] just some of the many linguistic and historical options that have been and can still be adopted… Source __________________ "And verily for everything that a slave loses there is a substitute, but […]

By: Faris

Faris — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:00:55 +0000

asalaamu ‘alaykum

I agree with brother Tarik. I dont see the benefit of this piece, especially in the situation that the Ummah is in today with the fitna of the modernists who completly deny politics and the Islamic State. And as there are no Islamic States today (Muslim States yes, but Islamic none) i believe we should be stressing the importance of ruling according to shariah, establishing an Islamic State & a Darul Islam. Thats one of greatest needs of our time but instead we get articles like which seem to undermine those who are calling for that.

Also i heard that hadith of the return of Khilafah on the Prophets minhaj was classed authentic by Sh. Albani- who has classified it as weak?
And what does the author have to say about all the hadiths that stress the importance of giving the pledge of allegiance to 1 Caliph/Imam?

By: Tarik

Tarik — Sun, 19 Sep 2010 13:13:03 +0000

I am concerned as to what the authors ultimate point is in this artilce. While he has affirmed the supperiority and apparent requirement that the Sharia’ah be the law of the land he seems to have left open the possibility that Islam is compatable with other systems of ruline i.e. that an Islamic democracy would be ok as long as the law of the land is Shariah. I think it is a bit dangerous and a potential slippery slope. First I don’t agree that the Caliphate is an option in Islam, despite what the author says about the soundness of the hadith he mentions the fact that the word “caliph” may not be required doesn’t change the fact that Islam calls for rule of one leader based upon his ruling the people by Islam. We must remember that the prophet (saw) said even when there are three on a journey one should be choosen to be the Imam. Additionally I don’t agree that the rules governing islamic governance are few. The prophet was clear that the successful group among the Muslims would be those who were on what he and his Sahab are on. The Sahab are an example for us and a guidance after the prophet. In fact the Ijma of the Sahab is a source of Legislation in Fiqh. Therefore how the Sahaba organized the Islamic government and administrated it is an evidence and source of law for us. True the Sahab dissagred on certain rulings (for example Abu Bakr and Umar disagreed on the issue of under what circumstances a wife would be considered divorced three times) there was no dissagreement on the idea that the Ummah must be ruled by one person to whom the Baya will be given. This leader had to be choosen based upon the opinions of the masses. Of course after the rightly guided Claiphs the manner of picking leaders became one of family inheritance – which of course is totally against Islam, this doesn’t alter the fact that there should be one ruler. I think when we talk as if Shura is our political mechanism we open the door for those who want to say Shura is democracy and democracy is Shura. We must be clear that Islam has its own unique political system which is not compatible with any other system. the source of our worship and political rules must be ISLAM and ONLY ISLAM. Once we mix Islam with some other system it is no longer Islam. This is my fear. The problem among the Ummah today (ruled as we are by oppressors everywhere in the Muslim world) is that we don’t know and have not taken the time to understand what Islam requires of us when it comes to ruling. There is no way of life acceptable to Allah other than Islam, it has come to bring Justice and Justice is not what “we” in our limited understanding believe to be just, Justice is what Allah brought through his Prophet (saw). This must be clear. Therefore ruling by any thing, using any method which is Not from Islam is in justice.

By: Justin

Justin — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 23:13:17 +0000

In reply to Justin. In other words, a candidate should say "vote for me because I will bring benefit to the country with XYZ policy" instead of "vote for me because Allah said so."

By: Justin

Justin — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 23:09:14 +0000

This is a very good article. I always believed Islam was flexible enough in Mu’amalat to accommodate different political arraignments. Islam does not fix political organization i.e. should the local civil legislature have one, two, or three houses? how many seats? how are they appointed or elected? what is their jurisdiction? how should the executive power be succeeded? what about Muslim/non-Muslim power sharing? etc. The Sahaba disagreed on these issues, i.e. the way Umar was succeeded was different from Uthman. So I think political organization questions have to be answered on a local level but in the spirit of the Maqasid Ash-Sharia.

What I don’t like are misguided Muslims who make takfir over legitimate political disagreements. They use the religion as a political weapon, to seize power or to smear an opponent. That is politicization of religion and it is wrong. I hope that makes sense.