Friday, December 31, 2010

Une journée Horrible pour les Avocats-The Tunisian Girl-Lina ben Mhenni

Le vendredi, 31 Décembre2010,  les avocats  tunisiens ont décidé de  se réunir à nouveau, portant un badge rouge,pour exprimer leur soutien à Sidi Bouzid habitants et à dénoncer les arrestations et l'utilisation de balles réellesdans plusieurs régions du pays ainsi que l’arrestation de plusieurs avocats et leur agression tout au long des évènements de Sidi Bouzid  . Mais comme d'habitude le gouvernement a décidé d'empêcher ces rassemblements à travers le recours à la violenceA Tunis,par exemple,  des agents de police en civil et les agents de la  force  de sécurité  ont assiégé de la zone du palais de justice. Ils ont empêché certains avocats d'entrer dans la zone et laisserd'autres y accéder. Lorsque les  avocats tenté de quitter la Maison du Barreau, où ils se réunissaient, les forces de sécurité sont intervenues et ont utilisé la violence. Certains avocats tels que: Leila Ben Debba et Samia Abbou, Hichem Guerfi, Fawzi Ben Mrad  ont été battus avec des matraques. Ils sont gravement blessés. De tels incidents se sont  produits dans différents gouvernorats et villes de la Tunisie. Nous avons entendu parler d'agressions contre des avocats dans Grombalia, Gafsa, Monastir, Mahdia, Sfax, Kasserine ... etc

De plus les forces de l’ordre ont confisqué les portables et les appareils photos des avocats pour effacer tous les enregistrements des affrontements.

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Al Muslimah

Between Irshad Manji and Osama bin Laden and those that follow them, their respective philosophies-often disingenuious, reactionary yet-always wrong dissemination about the Sahih and practical manifestation of Al Islam, there exists a large segment of our Ummah that remains silent. We call on perhaps just one, though we hope for more, to utilize the inherent power of her Allah-Granted voice and speak. The Harvard educated Orientalists and Professor Emeritus at the Univerity of California at Berkeley, Ira M. Lapidus wrote of this demographic within the Ummah in his A History of Islamic Societies:

One of the most difficult issues in the contemporary transformation of Muslim societies is the role of women…Our understanding of the nature of these changes is still extremely limited, partly due to the lack of adequate information and partly because the issues are clouded by intense and often ideological debate…In ancient pre-Islamic Near Eastern societies, the lives of women in the ruling classes were marked by seclusion and veiling…Women of other classes were  not secluded or veiled, and their roles were defined as household and craft work, care of children, and light agriculture, while heavy agricultural work, including plowing and irrigation, was done by men…The Qur’an found a middle ground between the conflicting Arabian precedents. In general it strengthed the patriarchial clan, and left the prerogatives of men largely intact, but it also enhanced the status of women. Women were no longer seen merely as mothers of warriors, but were recognized as persons of religious importance, entitled to modesty, privacy, and dignity. The Quran provided women with property rights, and rights to support in the case of divorce while pregnant. The Quran also favored mutuality in the relationships between husbands and wives, and counseled against hasty and willful divorces.[1]

Again, Abdul Malik al Sayed, a Muslim born scholar of political science, history, and public administration writes in his Social Ethics of Islam: Classical Islamic-Arabic Political Theory and Practice lines that confirm and further illuminate that of Lapidus:

From the start of Islam, Muhammad encouraged women to get their education, and appointed one of the most respected women of his time to teach his wife, Haifa. Women received their education at the same schools as men and were qualified to assume responsibilities in certain state areas, mainly in teaching. In the medical field female doctors were extensively employed as nurses to treat women. The Arab jurist Abu Hanifa declared in the eighth century that women were as entitled to practice the profession of law as men. In Iraq, women played a notable part, some devoting themselves to literature and some to good works. They were directed to work in colleges, orphanages, hospitals for the blind, the aged, and the infirm, and some of the institutions that exist today proudly bear the name of women founders. Despite the often repeated allegations in the West about the supposed subjugation of Muslim women, they were well-educated and were recognized as professors in the famous universities and the great mosques of the Islamic urban centers. Famed historians such as ibn Khallikan, al-Maqarri, and ibn Khaldun all made frequent mention of women as teachers in mosques and colleges. They also studied under the direction of women professors. The great Muslim theologian al Shafi’I informs us that he studied theology with a renowned woman professor in the main mosque in Cairo. In his autobiography, al Ta’Rif, ibn Khaldun stated that in certain schools and mosques, some of his courses were conducted by women professors. The famous prolific writer, Abu Hayyan, counted three women among the professors who taught him, one being the daughter of al Malik al Adil. There are numerous indications that women reflected a high degree of culture and urbanity in their governmental work; they often led a cultural life both in school and in public life. The profession of law, teaching, and administration required training and preparation before women could meet the competition.[2]

Juxtapose the aforementioned history of the Golden Age of Islamic Civilization as it relates to the status of the Muslimah and necessary public, professional exchange between the male and the female with an email I received just two days ago. With the authors identity remaining anonymous to the reader, I have been making any and all attempts at finding a Muslim woman who is strong enough to offer her voice into the public sphere, like the teachers of ibn Khaldun, al Adil, al Maraqqi, so that the adequate information Lapidus cites as missing can be collected and the Muslimahs Natural, i.e., Islamic Rights restored. The email reads:

I'm not sure why you think it's OK to use my friend list as a recruiting board for your blog. You are well aware of the cultural/religious problems that can arise from you requesting multiple times to be added to some woman's list when you don't even know them. This is NOT OK Ismail!! If you wanted to contact someone, you could have asked me first. I'm really annoyed right now and not sure what course of action I need to take. Please stop doing this immediately!! Thank you.

And for the sake of equity and fairness, my response:

I have not ASKED MULTIPLE times of anyone on your list...if you are referring to the sister from yesterday, I saw that she was a writer, but regardless, I will cease with those that have a connection to you...I have asked sisters and brothers from all over the world...You are welcome…I get requests for literary reasons from all over the world from WOMEN I DO NOT KNOW, after all this is a social network for which I AM USING TOWARDS an ISLAMIC PURPOSE…Do what you will...Inshallah, next time find out what is going on before you make a ton of assumptions

To which the Muslimah responded:

I'm sure you get all sorts of requests... But obviously you still don't realize the ramifications that can be involved. No worries, I WILL do what I need to. Thanks again.

It was an hour later that her friend sent me an email apologizing having confused with a completely different brother, but this is indicative of why the rights Guaranteed by Allah, The Lord of the Worlds, (SWT) are being denied to women all over the Ummah. First and foremost, these rights are too easily sacrificed on the altar of the idols of culture and convention, which is something I hate with my entire being. Culture is static. It changes, while it moves, morphing in and out of tastes of the masses as they eat, listen, and speak its influences. It is culture that has allowed men to draw clear lines of demarcation of public and private, placing women in the latter, to be controlled, subjugated, and denied her Natural, Islamic Right to Freedom of Expression and Happiness. The Muslimah has once again an oppressed piece of chattel in human form, and History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the vitriolic words of violent actions of the bad people, but appalling silence and indifference of the good people. Our generation will have to repent not only for the words and actions of the children of darkness, but also for the fears and apathy of the children of light.[3]

Hijab is not oppression. The prophet Muhammad(SAAW) said, ‘all of a woman is awrah. When she leaves her home, satan looks at her’ The scholars of hadith and those of fiqh have stated that satan looks at her because of the lustful eyes of men, which I, as a man who lives in a American college-town, can attest validity. She is awrah, according to the scholars, for she is likened to a home with no walls, doors, or locks. She can be injured. Moreover, she has been Commanded by her Lord(SWT) to dress modestly, cover her hair, for again the prophet Muhammad(SAAW) has said, that in public a woman must cover her body except for her face and her hands. Imam Al Shaf'ie included the whole basis of his school of thought in his scholarly work entitled, Al-Umm. In this book he says: "All [of] a woman's body is awrah with the exception of the lower part of her hands and her face. The top of her feet is also awrah." It is well known that awrah is an Islamic term which refers to the parts of the body which must be covered at all times. Ibn Rushd, a leading Maliki scholar says: "The great majority of scholars agree that all of a woman's body is awrah, with the exception of her face and the lower part of her hands. However, Imam Abu Haneefah considers that her feet are not part of her awrah." The main book which records the view of the Hanbali school of thought is that known as Al-Mughni, written by Ibn Qudamah. It is indeed the book to which reference is made generally when we want to know the Hanbali view. In this book, Ibn Qudamah writes: "All [of] a woman's body is awrah, with the exception of her face. As for the lower part of her hands, we have two different views." This means that the Hanbali school of thought includes scholars who consider that the hands, and we are here talking about the lower part of the hands up to the wrist - must be covered, and other scholars belonging to the same school of thought who are of the view that a woman may leave that part of her hands uncovered. Imam Ibn Hazam who was the one to put the Thahiri school of thought on solid foundation comments on an authentic Hadith as follows: "We see in this Hadith that Ibn Abbas saw women's hands in the presence of God's Messenger (peace be upon him). This means that it is correct to say that the hands and face of a woman are not awrah.[4]

Between Irshad Manji and Osama bin Laden is the Muslim women as Allah Commands and His messenger(SAAW) has shown The Only Tariq. Why is it so hard to find one to write about what it means to belong to a group that numbers 1.2 billion people, Inshallah?

Ya Allah, just send me a true Muslimah writer! For I am not a narcissist, and my voice cannot, should not, be the only Voice of the Ummah!!! Ya Rab!!

[1] Lapidus pg. 851
[2] Al Sayed pg. 231-232
[3] Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Monday, December 27, 2010

Manifestation pour Sidi Bouzid-The Tunisian Girl-Lina ben Mhenni

Aujourd'hui  j 'ai décidé de partager la douleur des habitants de Sidi Bouzid .Arrivée à l 'endroit indiqué  pour la manifestation , je ne fus pas surprise de voir que le nombre des policiers dépasse celui des manifestants. A 11 heures les manifestants ont levé des slogans dénonçant ce qui se passe à Sidi Bouzid, puis certain syndicalistes notamment un syndicaliste de Sidi Bouzid ont donné des discours concernant la situation de la région. Juste après les manifestants ont voulu arpenter les rues de Tunis. Les policiers leur ont barré le chemin ce qu'a engendré des affrontements violents et des bousculades et les manifestants ont réussi à passer à la rue Mongi Slim tout en continuant à crier les slogans et à chanter l 'hymne national. Les policiers continuaient à pousser tout le monde , à insulter les gens vulgairement et même à  tabasser certaines personnes. De la rue de Mongi Slim , les manifestants ont réussi à passer à la rue parallèle à celle de Mongi Slim. La bas de violents affrontements ont commencé. Des gens ont été écrasés et un jeune homme a été violemment battu par les policiers. Et les policiers ont forcé les manifestants à rebrousser chemin. Encore une fois à Mongi Slim , les manifestants ont levé leurs slogans pour la liberté de s'exprimer de manifester , pour le droit au travail , et pour les jeunes tués lors des évènements de Sidi Bouzid qui continuent et se propagent dans d 'autres régions. Puis tout le monde est retourné à la place Mohamed Ali ou des étudiants ont chanté l 'hymne de l 'UGET , certaines  des chansons de Marcel Khalifa , ainsi que l 'internationale.

Sidi Bouzaid Demonstration-The Tunisian Girl-Lina ben Mhenni

emonstration to Support Sidi Bouzid (2)

 The second demonstration to support Sidi Bouzid in Tunis took place today Monday, december 27th, 2010. It started at 1pm in Med Ali Place. Arrived there,  again, I was not surprised to see that police officers outnumbered the demonstrators. Nevertheless, the number of demonstrators was bigger than that of the first demonstration. People were singing the Tunisian National Anthem in harmony. Then they started shouting some slogans claiming the right of people to work , ti dignity, to freedom. They evoked freedom of press, freedom of demonstrating.

When they tried to move and to go through streets, demonstrators were prevented from doing so. Policemen started pushing them violently and clubbing them with their truncheons. They even threw  stones at demonstrators.  Four persons were severely injured. Some demonstrators tried to rush them to the hospital but policemen prevented them from leaving Mohamed Ali Place. Clashes between policemen and demonstrators lasted for a couple of hours. The Minister of Interior was present during the demonstration.

 Journalists were prevented from doing their job . They have been continuously harassed.

Sunday, December 26, 2010

The Idiocy of Suicide Bombing

The prophet Muhammad (SAAW) said:

"Whoever throws himself down from a mountain and kills himself, he will be in the Fire of Hell throwing himself down forever and ever. Whoever drinks poison and kills himself will have the poison in his hand, drinking it in the Fire of Hell forever and ever. Whoever kills himself with a piece of iron (i.e. a weapon) will have that piece of iron in his hand, stabbing himself in the stomach with it in the Fire of Hell forever and ever." (Sahih Bukhâri).

"He who commits suicide by throttling shall keep on throttling himself in the Hell Fire (forever) and he who commits suicide by stabbing himself shall keep on stabbing himself in the Hell-Fire."

"A man was inflicted with wounds and he committed suicide, and so Allah said: My slave has caused death on himself hurriedly, so I forbid Paradise for him."

Narrated Abu Huraira:
We were in the company of Allah's Apostle in a Ghazwa, and he remarked about a man who claimed to be a Muslim, saying, "This (man) is from the people of the (Hell) Fire." When the battle started, the man fought violently until he was wounded. Somebody said, "O Allah's Apostle! The man whom you described as being from the people of the (Hell) Fire fought violently today and died." The Prophet said, "He will go to the (Hell) Fire." Some people were on the point of doubting (the truth of what the Prophet had said) while they were in this state; suddenly someone said that he was still alive but severely wounded. When night fell, he lost patience and committed suicide. The Prophet was informed of that, and he said, "Allah is Greater! I testify that I am Allah's Slave and His Apostle." Then he ordered Bilal to announce amongst the people: 'None will enter Paradise but a Muslim, and Allah may support this religion (i.e. Islam) even with a disobedient man.'

Narrated Sahl bin Sad as Saidi:
Allah's Apostle (and his army) encountered the pagans and the two armies, fought and then Allah's Apostle returned to his army camps and the others (i.e. the enemy) returned to their army camps. Amongst the companions of the Prophet, there was a man who could not help pursuing any single isolated pagan to strike him with his sword. Somebody said, "None has benefited the Muslims today more than so-and-so." On that Allah's Apostle said, "He is from the people of the Hell-Fire certainly." A man amongst the people (i.e. Muslims) said, "I will accompany him (to know the fact)." So he went along with him, and whenever he stopped he stopped with him, and whenever he hastened, he hastened with him. The (brave) man then was wounded severely, and seeking to die at once, he planted his sword into the ground and put its point against his chest in between his breasts, and then threw himself on it and committed suicide. On that, the person (who was accompanying the deceased all the time) came to Allah's Apostle and said, "I testify that you are the Apostle of Allah." The Prophet said, "Why is that (what makes you say so)?" He said, "It is concerning the man whom you have already mentioned as one of the dwellers of the Hell-Fire. The people were surprised by your statement, and I said to them, "I will try to find out the truth about him for you." So I went out after him and he was then inflicted with a severe wound and because of that, he hurried to bring death upon himself by planting the handle of his sword into the ground and directing its tip towards his chest between his breasts, and then he threw himself over it and committed suicide." Allah's Apostle then said, "A man may do what seem to the people as the deeds of the dwellers of Paradise but he is from the dwellers of the Hell-Fire and another may do what seem to the people as the deeds of the dwellers of the Hell-Fire, but he is from the dwellers of Paradise."

Narrated Abu Huraira:
We witnessed (the battle of) Khaibar. Allah's Apostle said about one of those who were with him and who claimed to be a Muslim. "This (man) is from the dwellers of the Hell-Fire." When the battle started, that fellow fought so violently and bravely that he received plenty of wounds. Some of the people were about to doubt (the Prophet's statement), but the man, feeling the pain of his wounds, put his hand into his quiver and took out of it, some arrows with which he slaughtered himself (i.e. committed suicide). Then some men amongst the Muslims came hurriedly and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Allah has made your statement true so-and-so has committed suicide. "The Prophet said, "O so-and-so! Get up and make an announcement that none but a believer will enter Paradise and that Allah may support the religion with an unchaste (evil) wicked man.

Narrated Sahl:
During one of his Ghazawat, the Prophet encountered the pagans, and the two armies fought, and then each of them returned to their army camps. Amongst the (army of the) Muslims there was a man who would follow every pagan separated from the army and strike him with his sword. It was said, "O Allah's Apostle! None has fought so satisfactorily as so-and-so (namely, that brave Muslim). "The Prophet said, "He is from the dwellers of the Hell-Fire." The people said, "Who amongst us will be of the dwellers of Paradise if this (man) is from the dwellers of the Hell-Fire?" Then a man from amongst the people said, "I will follow him and accompany him in his fast and slow movements." The (brave) man was wounded, and wanting to die at once, he put the handle of his sword on the ground and its tip in between his breasts, and then threw himself over it, committing suicide. Then the man (who had watched the deceased) returned to the Prophet and said, "I testify that you are Apostle of Allah." The Prophet said, "What is this?" The man told him the whole story. The Prophet said, "A man may do what may seem to the people as the deeds of the dwellers of Paradise, but he is of the dwellers of the Hell-Fire and a man may do what may seem to the people as the deeds of the dwellers of the Hell-Fire, but he is from the dwellers of Paradise."

Narrated Haritha bin Wahb:
I heard the Prophet saying, "Shall I tell you of the people of Paradise? They comprise every poor humble person, and if he swears by Allah to do something, Allah will fulfill it; while the people of the fire comprise every violent, cruel arrogant person."

Wall Street Journal reporter Rehmat Mehsud wrote that on the 20th of Muharram, 1432 A.H., a misguided fool-a woman-from amongst us killed herself and 46 other Muslims at the World Food Aid program in Peshawar, Pakistan. Some 41,000 families in a nation ravaged by violence, floods, idiotic and ineffective government were feed by this program. I, having read the hadith of the most beloved of creation (SAAW) state without remorse nor trepidation, that this woman was a true misguided fool.

Islam loves, for Allah is The Most Loving and the Source from which Love Flows. I love the Ummah of Muhammad (SAAW) and my life and blood are for my people: the Muslims! I am not a pacifist, and if blood needs to be shed for the sake of Allah and His messenger (SAAW), I will not hesitate to achieve Victory for Allah. This is the Aim and Goal of Jihad: VICTORY FOR ALLAH or to die in said attempt, and not death. Death and Jannah are Rewards only Allah Can Provide and I have no right to destroy others or myself in the delusional attempt at killing to ease my suffering in this world. Today 41,000 families will go hungry on this day, and the next, because of the act of this misguided fool from amongst us.

Suicide bombing is haram. Allah and His messenger (SAAW) have Declared it. It must stop, and we must stop it.

Isma’il ibn Bilal

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Islamic Government-The Dialogue Series (Part III)

 ‘Umar  was reading a copy of the Torah translated into Arabic, as the Jews used to translate the Torah into Arabic. Abu Hurayrah said, “The people of the Scripture (Jews) used to recite the Torah in Hebrew and explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. On that, the Messenger of Allaah , said, "Do not believe the people of the Scripture or disbelieve them, but say: {We believe in Allaah and what is revealed to us.}[Quran 2:136].” [Al-Bukhaari]

This was explicitly stated in another version of this Hadeeth narrated by Al-Bazzaar on the authority of Jaabir . He said, “‘Umar copied part of the Torah in Arabic, brought it to the Prophet , and began to read it to him. As he read, the Prophet’s face changed color. One of the men of the Ansaar said, "Woe to you Ibn Al-Khattaab! Can you not see the face of the Messenger of Allaah?’ Thereupon, the Prophet , said, ‘Do not ask the People of the Book about anything for they will not guide you when they have gone astray. (If you listen to them) You will either disbelieve in what is right or believe in what is false. By Allaah, if Moses had been alive today, he would have been obliged to follow me.’” [Al-Haafith Ibn Hajar  said that one of its narrators is Jaabir Al-Ju‘fi and he is a weak narrator][1]

Words have power, my dear Abdassamad. Monarchy certainly is defined as absolute sovereignity embodied within one individual, who usually obtains said power at the death of his father, while relinquishes his throne at his death. This is not of the Islamic system, otherwise the prophet Muhammad(SAAW) and our Lord (SWT) Would Have Addressed it otherwise. Monarchy may have been Perfectly-Sanctioned by Allah for Bani Isra’il, but we belong to the new and final Ummah of the Seal of the Prophets (SAAW) and it is the reconstitution of Caliphate and Dar al Salaam, we as believers must seek. As previously stated, mankind is a political animal, and our interactions as it relates to groups and individual distinctions, separately and as each relates to one another, and each to hierarchy, the dynamics of power, rights, justice, and all of their respective sources and theories. Politics is the master art of the human being from all communal functions emanate from it, such as the idea of property, trade, employment, etc. If monarchy is to mean sovereignity in one man, while democracy means sovereignity of the common people-well, it is with respect that I ask you to justify either as Islamic when Allah (SWT), Alone, and without partner is Absolute Sovereign within the Islamic political framework. In short, I submit to you that in order that we fulfill our obligations to Allah and to one another, we must all serve defined roles, each holding significant portions of power, while we recognize the Law of Allah and the Sunna of the prophet Muhammad(SAAW). This is Islamic democratic-republicanism, which brings with it a system of checks and balances so that the Ummah can be educated, fed, housed, clothed, protected, and most importantly, ensured the Social Justice that are its collective members birthright Guaranteed by The Creator(SWT).

Abdul Malik al Sayed writes in his Social Ethics of Islam: Classical Islamic-Arabic Political Theory and Practice of nine principles by which a government, if they are applied, can be considered Islamic:

(1)     When the sovereignity of the people and of the state belongs to God, and the Islamic temporary state on earth is in reality a viceregency, its rights, and the rights of its deliberative bodies, whether the caliph’s or the consultative assembly’s, are subordinate to the law revealed by God through his prophet.
(2)     In Islamic states, Muslims have equal rights regardless of their origin, race, color, or language. No group, clan, class, or individual is entitled to special privileges. Nor can any such individual or group determine that any other group’s or individual’s position is inferior. The Prophet [SAAW] said: ‘Muslims are brothers to one another, none of them has any preference over another except on grounds of piety.
(3)     The Shari’ah is The Supreme Law under which everyone from the most humble person up to the head of the state must submit to the Qur’an and to the authentic practice and sayings of Muhammad who said, ‘Nations before you were destroyed because they punished those among them of low status according to law, and spared the high ranking. By God, Who Holds my life in His Hand, if Fatimah had committed theft, I would have chopped off her hand.’…
(4)     The government, its authority, and possessions, are a Trust of God and Muslims, and hence must be entrusted to him who is the most God-fearing, the most honest, and the most just. No Caliph, Imam, or president has a right to rule the community in ways not sanctioned by the Shar’ah…Muhammad[SAAW] said…’the head of the Islamic state must be appointed by Muslims, after due consultation and concurrence of Muslims. He must run the administration and take care of the legislative aspects which the Qur’an and the Sunnah left as the responsibility of the community.
(5)     Ali, the fourth caliph in Islam, reported that he asked the Prophet [SAAW], ‘what shall we do if we are faced with a problem after you die about which there is no notion in The Qur’an nor have heard anything concerning it from your lips?’ Muhammad answered, ‘Collect those of my people that serve God truthfully and place the matter before them for mutual consultation. Let it NOT be decided by an individual opinion’.
(6)     ‘The head of state, the Amir, must be obeyed ungrudgingly in whatever is right and just, (maruf) but no one has the right to command obedience in the service of sin (ma’siyah). The prophet said, ‘It is incumbent on a Muslim to listen to his Amir and obey whether he likes it or not, unless he is asked to do wrong; when he is asked to do wrong, he should neither listen nor obey…the caliph must be chosen based on his merit which eliminates any considerations based on roles, family origin, or previous social status…
(7)     The least fitted for responsible position in the government, especially the position of the caliph, and in higher administrative positions are those who overtly seek them. Muhammad said, ‘Verily, we do not entrust a post in this government of ours to anyone who seeks or covets it.’
(8)     The most important duty of the Caliph and the government of the Islamic state is to institute the Islamic order of life; to promote all that is good and to eliminate all things which are evil. The Qur’an said: ‘Those who, if we give them power in the land, establish worship, and pay the poor due and kindness and forbid inequity; and Allah’s is the sequel of events’.
(9)     It is not only the right but the duty of every member of the Muslim society to check the wrong, that which is abhorrent to the Islamic principles, committed by the government or any of its agencies. Muhammad said that, ‘the highest kind of jihad is to speak up for truth in the face of a tyrant or a government that deviates from the right path’.[2]

Al Sayed goes on to state this most salient assertion:

The rules of the early Islamic state were based on the foregoing principles. Members of the communities fully understood that Islam demanded democratic solutions to the political problems they faced in their daily lives; a solution could be achieved by the consultative assembly, Majlis al Shur’a. The Qur’an stated, ‘Their [the believers] communal business is to be transacted in consultation amongst themselves’. This made it imperative for the Muslims to delegate their legislative affairs to an assembly chosen by the community and specifically elected for this purpose. Decisions reached by Majlis al Shur’a through majority vote were not to be of an advisory character but legally binding on the executive, and thus not to be rejected by the holders of executive power[3]

Imagine an environment where your local imam had a position within the national government, representing the needs, the concerns, the rights of you and your family. It is within this national governmental body, Majlis al Shur’a, that he could identify the need for resources from the State treasury for roads, hospitals, schools, and the engineers, doctors, teachers, and administrators among you could bid on contracts in order to ensure their construction. Doctors, teachers, administrators, engineers, and all other Muslims like to eat. They like to live in finely manicured homes. Women like to have the hair-styled. Televisions, computers, laptops, cell phones; all are indirectly made possible via the Tertiary Economy from governmental investment into a single area: your hometown. Hospitals need not only doctors, but nurses and an army of people to perform any myriad of tasks in order to maintain its minimum and high standard of operations. All of this leads to better services within the community, while employing large segments of the community itself, and it is founded in a well-administered and functioning Government.

For some this will be a repeat to an earlier post, Inshallah, we pray they will bear it patiently. In his Islamica article, Mr. Khalil al-Anani correctly stated that centrist, Islamic-political parties can be, and indeed must be, the bulwark against the extremist provided that moderate political Islamic groups are allowed the opportunity to participate in the political arena. This, for al-Anani, will provide Muslim societies weary of violence, death, and destruction of the extremists with the Qur’anic-based politics of social justice, liberty, equality, and enlightenment. He calls for a shift in the political paradigm in order that Tunisia’s Nahda Party, Morocco’s Justice and Development Party, the Islamic Centre Party of Jordan, and a host of others can practically and fundamentally revolutionize their respective societies. Amr Hamzawy, in a policy brief for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, offers the wisest course of action that should, and indeed, must be championed by Western Muslims, in particular those of us who are American and British citizens. Hamzawy wrote in his ‘The Key to Arab Reform: Moderate Islamists’ that:

It is both desirable and feasible for the West to reach out to Islamist movements in the Arab world now that there are signs that some of these groups embrace nonviolence, pragmatism, and democratic procedures. Those who still insist that there is no thing as a ‘moderate Islamist’ miss the reality that activist organizations in Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, and Yemen have evolved after decades of failed opposition to repressive regimes…Islamists are critical of prevailing societal conditions in Arab countries, which they describe interchangeably as decadent, underdeveloped, or unjust; they blame authoritarian ruling elites for these societal conditions and therefore consider political change as the first crucial step toward altering Arab reality.

Hamzawy has provided the blueprint for what should and must be the political activism of Western Muslims, which God Willing, will facilitate al-Anani’s shift in paradigm and foster the creation of a practical, Islamic democratic-republic and a reconstitution of Dar al-Salaam from West Africa to Indonesia and the Adriatic to the Gulf of Aden. We cannot delude ourselves into the belief that this will be a reality in our lifetime, and of course, God Knows Best. Yet that which is equally undeniable and true, is that in order to secure the rights of Muslims in historically Muslim homelands-rights Endowed to all of us by our Creator, The One True and Living God-those of us in the United States and Great Britain must redefine the purpose of our political efforts and lay the foundation for the political future of our Ummah. As of now, there are several Muslim organizations, staffed with very talented individuals-both men and women-whose respective mission statements seem to be exactly the same: to improve the lives of Muslims within the boundaries of the nation-state in which they reside. This is vitally important in creating an informed, politically conscious Muslim population. Yet, this remains only one front in a much wider conflict. As Muslims living in the post-9/11 world, our greatest jihad lies in the global war of ideas, both in Muslim homelands and in the West. In order that we may claim victory for Islam, we must shift the paradigm that is our thinking about ourselves as a people, the politics/economic climate in which we live, begin to coordinate our efforts, and practically apply the following prophetic tradition to our society and politics. The prophet Muhammad (SAAW-May the Peace and Blessing of God be upon him) has said: none of you truly believes until he wants for his brother what he wants for himself. Therefore, the call for wisdom lies in the concerns of the brother who resides in Harlem, Newark, or Oakland being linked to the concerns of his brother in Alexandria, Beirut, or Algiers; and vice versa. The difference in language, culture, and skin complexion must all be superseded by the sublime testification of faith and the political implication that God Intended it to hold; that we are one community under One Lord. It is an un-Islamic and sophomoric attitude that we should divide ourselves politically because of national origin or notions of ethnicity and tribe. Indeed, our sacrificing our Islamic politics to the idols of culture, tradition, and convention is precisely the reason why we represent the weakest demographic on the planet. Moreover, if self-preservation is an instinct we possess as a people, we had better follow the guidance provided to us by the Qur’an and Sunna; engage in what Dr. Cornel West has termed Socratic Questioning; and coordinate our efforts towards a viable, peaceful, Islamic solution to problems that claim lives everyday in Iraq, Mubarak’s Egypt, Pakistan, in Gaza and the West Bank, and otherwise contribute to the systemic subjugation and institutional oppression of we, the Muslims.

The extremist have appeal because they offer a solution to today’s Muslim youth. It answers their frustrations and hopes to be free Western dominance and the Muslim autocrats they support. There is no doubt that the extremist solution is the wrong solution, but in the words of Martin Luther King:

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the vitriolic words of violent actions of the bad people, but appalling silence and indifference of the good people. Our generation will have to repent not only for the words and actions of the children of darkness, but also for the fears and apathy of the children of light.

I am a Muslim. I am aware that self-preservation is an instinct, we as a People, possess. We, the Muslims in general and the Islamic Nationalists in particular; whom love Allah (SWT), His messenger (SAAW), and the Islam that he (SAAW) received, understood, interpreted, propagated, and instructed are compelled to follow The Guidance Provided to us by The Holy Qur’an and the Sunna of the prophet (SAAW). The violent extremist, who have come from our midst, have appeal because they act. The extremist have appeal because they offer a solution that the living can see. No matter is it that the solution is warped, immoral, and un-Islamic; for it is a solution that embraces and is paradoxically fueled, by our youth’s frustration, joblessness, and hope for freedom. It is a solution that is fueled by the innocent lives destroyed in this world and in the next, in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. All Muslims long to be free and in a nation of our own. There is no doubt that we, the Muslims, who adhere to The True Islam, know that the extreme, violent determinism of our most unfortunate, misguided brothers and sisters is the wrong tactic, the wrong solution. Nevertheless, we must accept the words of Martin Luther King, Jr. as they apply to our most cavalier inaction. Those of us in the West have done a poor job in highlighting, propagating, and exposing the American and British people respectively-in particular policy and decision makers-of the sound, peaceful aspirations of the Nahda, Justice and Development, Islamic Centre parties, or Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood. We are either gripped with fear or too disinterested in following the Sunna of our beloved prophet Muhammad (SAAW) in relation to utilizing our political voice in a place where political expression is lawful and possible. Therefore, as our men, women, children are killed; suffer under high unemployment rates and poverty; suffer under political oppression of dictators, tyrants, and petromonarchs, who are often supported by the United States and Great Britain: we must look to ourselves, find our culpability, and engage in a parrhesia-bold speech- in a effort to cleanse the heart of the body politic-the Muslim Leviathan. This is consistent with a prophetic tradition when Muhammad (SAAW) said: speak the truth even though it be bitter. Yet, in order to speak truth, one must first search for it in one’s own nation, community, home, and individual actions. Are we, the Muslims of the West, truly concerned about the principles of Islam in their totality or are we here to engage in the free market fundamentalism that governs their political and economic system? Are we all brothers in a religion and creed that is founded upon the universality of mankind? If we answer in the affirmative, then how do we reconcile the fact that in far too many of our communities there are three mosques in a five-mile radius: one for Arabs, one for those of the Indian subcontinent and its Diaspora, and one for converts, primarily poor African-Americans? What does it mean, practically and in a political-economic sense, to be a Muslim? This is the Socratic Questioning that Dr. Cornel West has demanded that all Americans engage, in the hope that the answers compel a bloodless revolution whose goal is a Second Enlightenment. As Allah as my Witness, we the Muslims must engage in a similar enterprise-a communal Tasawwuf-in order to save our community irrespective of borders and gain redemption and salvation in Sight of our Lord, Exalted and Most High. If Hobbes is correct in his Leviathan that a nation is composed of its citizens, thereby creating one collective individual or body politic, then just as one man should engage in tasawwuf or Sufism to cleanse his heart, then so should a nation. The call to wisdom is a call to the international Muslim community to engage in tasawwuf, making its mission towards providing a greater understanding of Islam, promoting parrhesia, democratic-republicanism, and a new future. Those of us who quietly hold the sentiments of the Muslim Brotherhood and other moderate Islamic Nationalist parties in our hearts must begin to utilize our voices as citizens of the Ummah of our beloved prophet (SAAW). The Muslims of the West, collectively, have a done a poor job in condemning random, indiscriminate attacks against innocent civilians, no matter their national origin and religious affiliation. Furthermore, we have failed to justify the legitimate political concerns of hundreds of millions of our brothers and sisters throughout the Ummah. In short, our greatest sin is our moral cowardice. It is our collective silence, our enormous indifference, and our preoccupation with acquiring ‘the American Dream’ that all these forms of oppression and death to happen to our people, both home and abroad. Moreover, so long as Muslims throughout the globe are divided, plagued with neo-colonialist notions of progress, our understanding of Islamic Political Theory and local, community development will remain stunted. Households beget communities, communities beget cities within provinces, and provinces beget nation-states: Western imperial powers have constructed the boundaries that separate Kuwait from Iraq or Egypt from Sudan. Muslims who nearly a century ago, sacrificed their iman for worldly power rallied the masses to love their being Arab or Pakistani or Saudi, more than their love for being a servant of The One True and Living God and member of the Ummah of the prophet Muhammad(SAAW).

Isma'il ibn Bilal

Kings and Kingdoms, Abdassamad Clarke-The Dialogue Series Part II

There are several things which come to mind in response to your post.

First, you assume that because the kings cited in the Qur'an were prophets or appointed by prophets, that this is an exceptional circumstance, but the prophets were all sent to demonstrate the deen, and in taking upon themselves kingship, they were demonstrating a form of governance.

There are sunnahs of the prophets which are not sunnahs for us, such as fasting continuously or marrying more than four wives, but then there has to be a definite proof that such is the situation. Otherwise, it is very dangerous indeed to consider the practice of the prophets as being elevated and beyond our reach since the very essence of what they were doing is demonstrating the way for us.

This in fact happened in Madinah when one of the Companions asked about kissing one's wife while fasting. This is from the Muwatta:

"A man kissed his wife while fasting in Ramadan, and became very upset because of that. So he sent his wife to ask on his behalf about that. She went to visit Umm Salamah, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and mentioned that to her. So Umm Salamah informed her that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would kiss while fasting. So she returned and informed her husband about that, but that only increased him in distress, and he said: “We are not like the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Allah makes halal for His Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, whatever He wishes.” Later his wife return to Umm Salamah and found the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, with her. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “What is the situation with this woman?” So Umm Salamah informed him. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Have you not informed her that I do that.” She said: “I have informed her and she went to her husband and told him and that increased his distress, and he said: “We are not like the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Allah makes halal for His Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, whatever He wishes.” So the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, became angry and said: “By Allah! I have the most taqwa of Allah of any of you, and I am the most knowledgeable of you of His limits.”"

There is no evidence of the kingship mentioned in the Qur'an being exclusively for prophets alone or those appointed by prophets, because that would need some clear statement to that effect. None exists.

Of course, we are already loaded with preconceptions, and we are largely arguing about our preconceptions, for example, what we think kingship is.

Monarchy means simply rule by one man, and as Philip Blond said in his radio talk, we are always ruled by one man or woman, whether a king, prime minister, president or dictator.

King may derive from two possible Germanic roots: to know (ken) or to be able (can), and these are also qualifications for a khalifah.

We have a daft image, largely from the forces that work constantly to prevent the re-emrgence of kingship, of absolutist monarchs ruling imperiously and arbitrarily, but any serious historical study will find far more consultation taking place around monarchs than does now in Congress or the British Cabinet.

However, the most misleading thing in your article, Sidi Isma'il, is that of taking philosophers' discussion of these matters too seriously, for these things proceed by the realities of power and politics, not by the wishes of philosophers, who are largely a helpless lot. Indeed, because of their distance from the seat of power, they have often quite mistaken ideas of how these things work and are merely whistling in the dark.

Of those who should be paid attention to, certainly Ibn Khaldun is one, simply because he was rarely very far from actual power and history in the making.

Let us be clear. If we talk of monarchy, there is no sense of a king being above the law. Whatever form of rulership we have, rulers are only put in place to put the law into effect.

As for consultation, Allah commands the ruler to consult, and He commands that when he has made up his mind, he should rely on Allah. It is not, as mistaken modernists insist, that the ruler is bound by majority decisions. This is wrong by the text of the Qur'an and by the practice of the khulafa, although there is sometimes wisdom in the view of a majority of knowledgeable people. As to the majority of the masses, that is completely irrelevant, since repeatedly in the Qur'an, Allah, exalted is He, says words to the effect: "Most of them do not believe," "most of them do not know," etc. Majority in the political sense as used today is certainly no proof.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Kings and Kingship, The Dialogue Series

Man is a political animal endowed with speech, memory, the capacity for abstract thought, deductive and inductive reasoning, knowledge of The Divine Spirit that Created the world and all within it, and he has been given the opportunity to choose. He is the vicegerent of The Divine Spirit entrusted with the world in which he lives. He is the trustee of himself and his brother and sisters, charged with creating a society free of injustice, oppression, poverty, and real hunger. The science of politics is not merely concerned with law, constitutions, government, and states; for this is the laymen’s view. Yet at its essence politics is the study of human interactions as it relates to individual and group distinctions, separately and as each relates to one another, and each to hierarchy, the dynamics of power, rights, justice, and all of their respective sources and theories. Having lived as a Muslim, who was drawn to Islam because of its primordial Beauty and Message to me as an individual and as a member of the human race, I can attest to the current truths and diseases within the Ummah.  Poor management, grandiose delusions, forgetfulness, and his need to satiate the hunger of his passions have led to master-slave dialectic.  Hegel is correct that the master cannot live without the slave, for without slaves-without servants-who would identify him as a master. Yet contrary to the Hegelian assertion, the servant, quite correctly, lives in the knowledge that his master controls his destiny, his livelihood, his ‘daily bread’, and ultimately his politics. The servant is bound to his master in practice, while the master is bound to him in theory. The servant has no choice but to engage in some type of work in order to secure his most basic needs; in order to eat, to possess shelter, to possess clothing, and security he must do his master’s bidding. Who has supplanted Allah (SWT) as the master of the Muslim? Whose bidding must he obey in order to maintain his position in this world? Moreover, what has been his response? The servant needs the master as much as the master needs the servant. ? Under what system is the least of us as important as the best of us? What is truly the virtue of being human; and of creating and maintaining virtuous households where the citizen compels himself to live justly among the other households in the village? What are the individual’s duty to the community and the community’s duty to the individual? Finally, how does the State achieve Ultimate Happiness within its realm with the goal of each citizen feeling and benefitting from the efforts of their government, while privacy, individual rights and property are held sacred? These are the questions for the Islamic Nationalist who is dedicated to the study of Islamic Political Theory and its practical application, for al-Farabi has identified the vain philosopher as, he who learns the theoretical sciences, but without going any further and without being habituated to doing the acts considered virtuous by a certain religion or the generally accepted noble acts. Instead, he follows his own inclination and appetites in everything, whatever they may, happen to be.

My dear brother Abdassamad identifies quite correctly that in our past as human beings and Muslims, The Lord of the Worlds (SWT) has Appointed kings to rule over the respective communities. Yet, he neglects to mention that all of these Divinely Appointed Kings were also prophets (AS) or like Talut, selected by prophecy, and were men who could be entrusted with absolute rule for the very nature of their characters were just and in accordance with The Commands of The Lord of the Worlds. Moreover, Qur’anic Revelation of human history does not preclude the ummah of Muhammad (SAAW) from repeating the Test of Bani Isra’il. It is a Warning to those of us who are Muslim to choose leadership for the correct reasons. Allah States in His Glorious Qur’an:

And whenever We sent a Herald of Warning to any town, its wealthy people said, “We disbelieve in what you have been sent with.”And they said, “We are greater in wealth and children; we will not be punished!” Proclaim “Indeed my Lord eases the sustenance for whomever He wills and restricts it for whomever He wills, but most people do not know.”[1]

To use these Ayahs as an argument against people choosing their leadership-not their laws-is extraordinarily tenuous at best. Democracy is not defined merely as rule of the people, as this is its etymology. For example, in our contemporary times nations carry the adjective of democracy and/or republic in their official titles: the Democratic People’s Republic of, Hellenic Republic, Federative Republic of, Republic of; even the United States of America is a federal constitutional republic, as is its neighbors to both the immediate north and south. If North Korea, Greece, Brazil, Yemen, Indonesia, as well as Canada and Mexico can be made to fit into a single category of democracy in their collective theories and applications of said theory, then my dear Abdassamad is quite correct in his ‘quick’ analysis of democracy. Yet, we submit that the notion of democratic theory is as diverse and divergent as the human race itself. Moreover, all political philosophers would agree that this type of government is as old as monarchy and not without its pitfalls and dangers. We agree with Aristotle, as does al Farabi, when he wrote, ‘It must not be assumed, as some are fond of saying, that democracy is simply that form of government in which the greater number are sovereign, for in oligarchies, and indeed in every government, the majority rules; nor again is oligarchy that form of government in which a few are sovereign’. [2] Aristotle identifies three forms of government, and their three respective degenerations: kingly rule degenerates into tyranny, aristocracy into oligarchy, and constitutional government into democracy. All Muslim political philosophers and observers must recognize this all-salient factor: democracy is merely the most tolerable of the three failing systems by which mankind are organized within the confines of the State. Aristotle goes on to state in the Politics:

Of forms of democracy first comes that which is said to be based strictly on equality. In such a democracy the law says that it is just for the poor to have no more advantage than the rich; and that neither should be masters, but both equal. For if liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost. And since the people are the majority, and the opinion of the majority is, decisive, such a government must necessarily be a democracy. Here then is one sort of democracy. There is another, in which the magistrates are elected according to a certain property qualification, but a low one; he who has the required amount of property has a share in the government, but he who loses his property loses his rights. Another kind is that in which all the citizens who are under no disqualification share in the government, but still the law is supreme. In another, everybody, if he be only a citizen, is admitted to the government, but the law is supreme as before. A fifth form of democracy, in other respects the same, is that in which not the law by their decrees. This is a state of affairs brought about by the demagogues. For in democracies which are subject to the law the best citizens hold the first place, and there are no demagogues; but where the laws are not supreme, there demagogues spring up. For the people becomes a monarch, and is many in one; and the many have the power in their hand, not as individuals, but collectively…The spirit of both is the same, and they alike exercise a despotic rule over the better citizens. The decrees of the one correspond to the edicts of the tyrant; and the demagogue is to the one what the flatterer is to the other. Both have great power-the flatterer with the tyrant, the demagogue with democracies of the kind we are describing. The demagogues make the decrees of the people override the laws, by referring all things to the popular assembly. And therefore they grow great, because the people have all things in their hands, and they hold in their hands the votes of the people, who obey them…Such a democracy is fairly open to the objection that it is not a constitution at all; for where the laws have no authority, there is no constitution. The law ought to be supreme over all, and the magistracies should judge of particulars, and only this should be considered a constitution. So that if democracy be a real form of government, the sort of system in which all things are regulated by decrees is clearly not even a democracy in the true sense of the word, for decrees relate only to particulars. These then are the different kinds of democracy.[3]

In 622ce, the prophet Muhammad (SAAW) ordered the drafting of a Constitution for the people of Medina. Its 47 amendments or decrees further supported its first, which read: this is a document from Muhammad the prophet (governing the relations) between the believers and Muslims of Quraysh and Yathrib, and those who followed them and joined them and labored with them. In Aristotelian terms, this was a polity or constitutional government that had been established on the Arabian Peninsula. It is a fusion of democracy and of aristocracy, in that all Muslims were equal under the Law and Command of Allah, with access to their government, who was headed by not only the best amongst them, in the prophet Muhammad (SAAW), but also the Best of Creation. Aristocracy means, rule of the most excellent, and within the vein of Islam this can only be the most pious. It was from this class of his (SAAW) Sahaba that the prophet (SAAW) would select the individuals needed for administering in government. However, our true lesson and Founding Principle of Muslim Government can only come after The Holy Message was Delivered upon the death of our beloved prophet (SAAW):

Ali had now withdrawn to his house, and with him were Zubayr and Talhah. The rest of the Emigrants gathered around Abu Bakr and they were joined by Usayd and many of his clan. But most of the Helpers, of Aws as well as Khazraj, had assembled in the hall of the Bani Sa’idah of whom Sa’d ibn Ubadah was chief, and word was brought to Abu Bakr and Umar that they were debating there the question as to where the authority should lie, now that the prophet [SAAW] was dead. They had gladly accepted his authority; but failing him, many of them were inclined to think that the sons of Qaylah should be ruled by none except a man of Yathrib, and it appeared that they were about to pledge allegiance to Sa’d. Umar urged Abu Bakr to go with him to the hall, and Abu Ubaydah went with them. Sa’d was ill and he was lying in the middle of the hall, wrapped in a cloak. On behalf of him another of the Helpers was about to address the assembly when the three men of Quraysh entered, so he included them in his speech, which began, after praise for God, with the words: ‘We are the Helpers of God and the fighting force of Islam; and ye, O Emigrants, are of us, for a group of your people have settled amongst us.’ The speaker continued in the same vein, glorifying the Helpers, and while giving the Emigrants a share of that glory, deliberately failing to recognize the unique position that they held in themselves as the first Islamic community. When he had finished Umar was about to speak, but Abu Bakr silenced him and spoke himself, tactfully but firmly, reiterating the praise of the Helpers, but pointing out that the community of Islam was now spread throughout Arabia, and that the Arabs as a whole would not accept the authority of anyone other than a man of Quraysh, for Quraysh held a unique and central position amongst them. In conclusion he took Umar and Abu Ubaydah each by hand and said: ‘I offer you one of these two men. Pledge your allegiance to whichever these ye will.’ Then another of the Helpers rose and suggested that there should be two authorities, and this led to a heated argument, until finally Umar intervened, saying: ‘O Helpers, know ye not that the messenger of God [SAAW] ordered Abu Bakr to lead the prayer?...Then which of you will willingly take precedence over him?’…Umar seized the hand of Abu Bakr and pledged allegiance to him, followed by Abu Ubaydah, and others of the Emigrants who had now joined them. Then all the Helpers who were present likewise pledged their allegiance to Abu Bakr, with the exception of Sa’d, who never acknowledged him as Caliph[Vicegerent for the messenger of God (SAAW)], and who eventually migrated to Syria. Whatever they decided in the hall, it would have been unacceptable for anyone to have led the prayers in the Mosque in Medina except Abu Bakr, so long as he was there; and the next day at dawn, before leading the prayer, he sat in the pulpit, and Umar rose and addressed the assembly, bidding them pledge their allegiance to Abu Bakr, whom he described as ‘the best of you’…then Abu Bakr gave praise and thanks to God and addressed them, saying: ‘I have been given authority over you, and I am not the best of you. If I do well, help me; and if I do wrong, set me right. Sincere regard for truth is loyalty and disregard for truth is treachery. The weak amongst you shall be strong with me until I have secured his rights, if God will; and the strong amongst you shall be weak with me until I have wrested from him the rights of others, if God will. Obey me so long as I obey God and His messenger [SAAW]. But if I disobey God and His messenger [SAAW], ye owe me no obedience. Arise for your prayer, God have Mercy upon you.

If Abu Bakr, who is mentioned via pronoun within the Holy Qur’an; who was selected by the prophet Muhammad(SAAW) to lead the prayer in his postmortem; if he did not declare himself king, nor fulfill the role of monarchy, then what man in the 21st century can rightfully expect our generation of Muslims to recognize a Muslim-king? Monarchy is antithetical to Islam, for Allahu Malik, and it is our goal as an Ummah to restore the Vicegerency of the Seal of the Prophets (SAAW). How can this best be achieved? It is within the framework of what Aristotle, and perhaps more correctly Cicero, has termed a mixed government-a combination of democracy/aristocracy/monarchy-by, which the Ummah can practically be governed. Moreover, lest we forget, we as Muslims are bound to the precedents set by the prophet (SAAW) and the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs in relation to political jurisprudence and administration. As has been mentioned previously to my dear Abdassamad, the best scholar in our contemporary times on this subject is Abdul Malik al Sayed.

Inshallah, I will leave my response here, though I plan on writing a treatise on the method by which a modern, Islamic government can be created…

Isma'il ibn Bilal

[1] The Holy Qur’an 34:34-36
[2] Aristotle, The Politics, Book IV:4
[3] Ibid