NEGARA ISLAM MALAYSIA: SATU HURAIAN ILMIAH 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday, 18 May 2004

USTAZ SHUKRI MOHAMAD, UM

(Komen webmaster: Sila baca dengan teliti dan berfikir dengan ilmiah dalam menerima dan membahaskan pandangan Ustaz Shukri Mohamad. Pada hemat saya ianya amat baik untuk kita membuat penilaian sendiri, sejauhmanakah konsep negara Islam yang dilaungkan oleh kerajaan BN dan perjuangan oleh PAS bagi mendaulatkannya atau melihatkan tertegak di bumi Malaysia)

Pendahuluan

Perkataan negara Islam bukan satu perkara baru dalam Islam. Bagi PAS inilah agenda penting perjuangan mereka sejak sekian lama, namun ianya belum selesai. Walaupun begitu ada petanda yang memberangsangkan kerana agenda negara Islam mereka semakin mendapat sambutan masyarakat Islam dan bukan Islam.

Perkembangan ini tidak memberi banyak keuntungan kepada Parti lawannya iaitu UMNO, sekiranya UMNO tidak bijak melakukan percaturan dalam isu yang besar ini. Sekurang-kurangnya UMNO perlu bersedia dengan senjata yang lebih baik untuk mengelakkan diri daripada ditenggelamkan dalam isu ini. Lalu perkataan negara Islam mula diangkat tinggi menjadi istilah yang paling laris di pentas politik Malaysia dewasa ini. Ia bermula dengan desakan dan cabaran Dr. Mahathir PM Malaysia dan Parti DAP kepada PAS supaya mengisytiharkan bentuk negara Islam yang hendak dijalankan oleh PAS.

Cabaran ini disambut oleh pemimpin PAS secara politik kerana cabaran tersebut dianggap satu isu politik untuk mengaut keuntungan dan sokongan orang Islam dan bukan Islam. Presiden Parti Islam telah mencabar Dr. Mahathir mengiytiharkan Malaysia sebagai negara Islam di Parlimen. Dr. Mahathir tidak menyahut cabaran tersebut, sebaliknya membuat pengisytiharan negara Islam sewaktu ucapan perasmian mesyuarat Agung Parti Gerakan. Sebelum itu, iaitu menjelang pilihanraya umum Negeri Sarawak, Parti DAP telah mengisytiharkan keluar daripada Barisan Alternatif iaitu gabungan kerjasama parti pembangkang, atas alasan tidak bersetuju dengan hasrat PAS mahu menegakkan Negara Islam melalui BA.

Jelasnya isu negara Islam telah menjadi topik utama yang dipergunakan oleh pihak UMNO untuk memerangkap PAS melalui media masa cetak dan elektronik sepanjang hari.

Walaupun ianya begitu hangat ditimbulkan kebelakangan ini, namun sebenarnya UMNO telah membuat berbagai persediaan untuk menjawab tuduhan PAS bahawa Malaysia bukan sebuah negara Islam. UMNO sedar bahawa lebel ďMalaysia bukan negara IslamĒ mendatangkan kesan yang amat buruk kepada UMNO dari segi sokongan orang Islam. Oleh yang demikian Presiden UMNO mahu satu jawapan tegas dan hujah konkrit dapat disimpulkan dengan kadar segera bahawa Malaysia adalah sebuah negara Islam.

Sebab itu dalam perkembangan yang berlaku, seluruh tumpuan diberikan kepada usaha menambah dan mengukuhkan hujah bahawa Malaysia adalah negara Islam. Di antara usaha sungguh-sungguh yang dilakukan ialah: Debat olok-olok yang dibuat oleh UMNO berkaitan dengan isu negara Islam dan isu takfir.

Langkah seterusnya ialah mengeluarkan buku dan kertas kerja yang menghuraikan konsep negara Islam Malaysia. Antaranya Kertas kerja/buku negara Islam yang ditulis oleh Wan Zahidi Wan Teh dan Kertas Kerja berkaitan negara Islam yang ditulis oleh Dato Haji Nakhae Hj Ahmad.

Beberapa siri penjelasan tentang negara Islam Malaysia telah dibuat melibatkan para ulama yang berada dalam Parti UMNO, terutamanya melalui siaran televisyen, seminar, khutbah jumaat dan perjumpaan. Kemuncak kepada usaha itu ialah pengisytiharan negara Islam yang dibuat oleh PM selaku presiden UMNO tempoh hari.

Bagi PAS, mereka seolah-olah tidak berganjak daripada sikap lama yang menolak sebarang kenyataan negara Islam daripada pihak UMNO. Beberapa pimpinan tertinggi PAS membuat kenyataan agar isu negara Islam ini dibincang secara bersemuka dengan pihak UMNO. Akhirnya Timbalan Presiden UMNO telah mengeluarkan kenyataan bahawa perbincangan tidak perlu dibuat kerana kedudukan negara Malaysia sebagai negara Islam sudah jelas dan tidak boleh dipertikaikan lagi.

Inilah gambaran dan latarbelakang yang mewarnai isu negara Islam di Malaysia sehingga isu itu begitu panas sepertimana hangatnya nama Osama bin Laden dengan Presiden Amerika Bush selepas peristiwa hitam serangan ke atas Pusat Dagangan Dunia di Amerika Syarikat pada bulan September 2001 yang lepas.

Berdasarkan latarbelakang itu, kita perlu melihat isu negara Islam dalam konteks akademik dan keilmuan, kerana penjelasan secara keilmuwan dapat menghuraikan perselisihan yang berlaku dengan lebih baik. Melalui perbincangan ilmiah, asas teori dan permasalahan dapat dilihat dengan lebih jelas dan adil. Ini sudah tentu dapat kerana penjelasan secara keilmuwan dapat membantu mengghuraikan menggunakan metod munaqasyah dan menolak hujjah pihak kedua.


 

Metod ini digunakan untuk mematikan hujah pihak lawan, seperti alasan ini tidak dapat dielakkan kerana perbincangan yang dibuat biasanya akan sampai kepada kesimpulan dan jawapan. Ia menghasilkan sesuatu rumusan yang menepati mana-mana pandangan dan secara terbuka kita harus menerima kenyataan tersebut dengan penuh insaf dan takwa. Kita perlu menolak sikap keras kepala dan degil dalam menerima kebenaran ilmu dan hujjah.

Untuk tujuan tersebut, kertas ini akan membincangkan beberapa persoalan berikut yang dikira paling rapat hubungannya dengan isu negara Islam yang diperdebatkan kini.

                                 Persoalan Pertama: Apakah metod Ulama UMNO mendakwa negara Malaysia sebagai negara Islam ?

                                 Persoalan Kedua: Bagaimanakah pula konsep negara Islam yang dibawa oleh Parti Islam SeMalaysia dan apakah hujah mereka bahawa Malaysia bukan negara Islam

                                 Persoalan Ketiga: Apakah kaedah yang digunakan oleh Ulama Islam silam dalam mentakrifkan sebuah negara Islam,negara kufur/ negara musuh dan negara yang membuat perjanjian dengan negara Islam?

                                 Persoalan Keempat: Analisis dan Penilaian terhadap metod yang digunakan oleh UMNO dan PAS

                                 Persoalan Kelima: Sejauhmana Kedudukan Islam dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan? (Persoalan ini tidak dikupas)

                                 Persoalan Keenam: Apakah sebenarnya status negara Malaysia menurut pandangan ilmu Politik Islam? Apakah sikap politik Islam terhadap polimik ini?

Dalam menghuraikan persoalan di atas, kita akan merujuk kepada hujah al-Quran melalui tafsiran para ulama, begitu juga hadith-hadith Nabi. Malah model negara Islam Madinah merupakan petunjuk utama yang akan menjadi pegangan dan asas perbincangan. Manakala pendapat para ulama akan dikupas dan dianalisis bagi menentukan kaedah yang digunakan dan juga tujuan di sebalik daripada kenyataan tersebut.

Kertas ini diharap tidak menimbulkan salah tafsiran oleh setengah pihak, sebaliknya menerima secara terbuka berdasarkan metod dan disiplin ilmu yang betul untuk mencari hakikat sesuatu perkara. Sebarang teguran dan kritikan adalah dialu-alukan dari semua pihak. Sekian terima kasih.

Persoalan Pertama: Apakah Metod Ulamaí UMNO mendakwa negara Malaysia sebagai Negara Islam ?

Pemimpin UMNO yang dilihat banyak mengambil bahagian dalam menjelaskan konsep negara Islam Malaysia ialah:

Datoí Sri Hamid Othman, iaitu Penasihat Khas Agama Perdana Menteri Malaysia, Dato Haji Nakhae Hj Ahmad iaitu Yang Dipetua YADIM, Wan Zahidi Wan Teh iaitu Pegawai Unit Penerangan Khas Kementerian Penerangan Malaysia.

Beberapa tokoh dari IKIM juga terlibat secara langsung dalam perbincangan dengan menyokong konsep negara Islam Malaysia, seperti Pengarah IKIM Datoí Dr. Ismail Ibrahim dan Fellow Kehormat IKIM Ust Othman al-Muhammadi.

Selain dari mereka itu, ada lagi tokoh-tokoh lain yang memberikan pandangan mereka, Cuma tidak ada huraian detail daripada mereka, sebaliknya memberikan komen apabila ditanya oleh pihak media sahaja, Contohnya Dato Prof. Dr. Mahmood Zuhdi Hj Abd. Majid Pengarah Akademi Pengajian Islam, Universiti Malaya pernah membuat beberapa kenyataan bahawa Negara Islam secara ideal tidak ada sekarang. Yang ada sekarang ialah negara Islam menurut rasional. Beliau juga pernah menyebut Malaysia boleh dianggap negara Islam, tetapi termasuk dalam kategori tidak memenuhi syarat sepertimana orang fasik.

Di antara metod dan kaedah yang digunakan Oleh Dato Haji Nakhae Hj. Ahmad dan Wan Zahidi Wan Teh serta rakan-rakan yang lain untuk mengisthbatkan negara Malaysia sebagai negara Islam ialah:

1. Membentuk asas teori negara Islam menurut tafsiran dan pandangan Abu Hanifah dan beberapa fuqaha lain

2. Menggunakan metod qiyas

3. Menggunakan metod pengukuhan dan pengesahan secara tawsif /ciri-ciri

4. Menggunakan metod Perlembagaan Negara

5. Menggunakan metod akal dan logik

6. Menggunakan metod munaqasyah dan menolak hujjah pihak kedua.


Metod Pertama:

Membentukan asas teori negara Islam, berdasarkan pandangan para Fuqaha dan tafsiran-tafsiran mereka

Pengertian Negara Islam telah dinyatakan oleh beberapa Ulamaí silam dalam kitab mereka, termasuklah huraiannya sekali. Dengan merujuk kepada pendapat-pendapat tersebut, UMNO membuat tafsiran tertentu sehingga selaras dengan maksud dan tujuan yang dikehendaki iaitu: ďMalaysia sebagai sebuah negara IslamĒ.

Pendapat yang popular yang selalu menjadi rujukan dan sandaran hujjah ialah pengertian Dar kufr yang disebut oleh al-Kasani dari Mazhab Hanafi dalam Kitabnya BadaíIíalsanaíIí, juz 7, halaman 130-131 (cetakan Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, Beirut 1986)

Al-Kasani menyebut pendapat Abu Yusuf dan Muhammad al-Syaibani (murid Abu Hanifah):

Maksudnya: Sesungguhnya kenyataan yang kami sebut dar al-Islam dan dar kufr ialah menyandarkan keadaan negara kepada Islam dan kepada kufur. Sebenarnya disandarkan negara kepada Islam atau kepada kufur adalah kerana zahir/menonjolnya Islam atau menonjolnya kufur di dalamnya. Contoh lain ialah sebagaimana Syurga dinamakan Dar al-Salam dan neraka sebagai Dar al-Bawar, kerana adanya keselamatan dan kesejahteraan dalam syurga dan wujudnya kesengsaraan dalam neraka.

Al-Kasani menyambung lagi kenyataanya:

Maksudnya: Zahirnya Islam dan zahirnya kekufuran itu bermaksud zahir dan menonjolnya hukum/undang-undang/peraturan kedua-duanya, Maka apabila zahirnya/dominannya hukum kufur dan undang-undangnya dalam sebuah negara, maka jadilah ia Dar kufr dan betullah sandaran tersebut (al-idafah). Dan begitulah juga akan jadi sebuah negara sebagai negara Islam apabila zahir dan menonjolnya undang-undang Islam di dalamnya tanpa syarat yang lain.

Dalam kenyataan yang berkaitan al-Kasani menambah pendapat Imam Abu Hanifah:

Maksudnya: Pendapat Abu Hanifah mengenai maksud sandaran negara kepada Islam dan kufur bukan kerana ain/zat Islam atau kufur, tetapi maksudnya ialah dari aspek keamanan atau ketakutan. Maknanya ialah: Jika keamanan bagi orang Islam secara mutlak dan ketakutan bagi orang kafir secara mutlak, maka ia adalah negara Islam. Jika keamanan di dalamnya bagi orang kafir secara mutlak dan ketakutan bagi orang Islam secara mutlak, maka ia adalah negara kufur. Peraturan/hukum-hukum itu diasaskan kepada keamanan dan ketakutan, bukannya bergantung kepada Islam atau kufur, kerana pemakaian kaedah aman dan takut itu lebih baik dan utama.

Berhubung dengan pendapat para Ulama Hanafi di atas, pendapat Abu Hanifah telah menjadi sandaran untuk meletakkan Malaysia sebagai negara Islam, Datoí Nakhaei menyatakan:

ďTetapi, saya lebih meyakini pendapat bahawa negara-negara bangsa sekarang termasuk Malaysia, kekal statusnya sebagai Negara Islam. Hujah-hujah dari segi hukum telah dijelaskan sebelum ini. Justeru tidaklah perlaksanaan hukum itu menjadi syarat utama bagi Abu Hanifah dan ulama dari Mazhab al-Syafii bagi menentukan sesebuah negara itu sebagai negara IslamĒ

Teori Pertama mereka ialah: ďadanya beberapa ciri tertentu daripada ciri-ciri lengkap sebuah negara Islam, akan mengekalkan statusnya sebagai negara Islam, meskipun tidak sepenuhnya sebagaimana di zaman Rasulullah s.a.w dan khulafa al-Rasyidin.Ē Inilah sebenarnya asas permasalahan atau asas teori negara IslamĒ (asl al-masíalah) dalam persoalan ini mengikut pendapat Dato Nakhaei.

Ini menunjukkan beliau tidak mengambil pandangan Abu Yusuf dan Muhammad al-Syaibani yang mengatakan bahawa dominan undang-undang Islam dalam sebuah negara merupakan asas bagi sebuah negara Islam. Atau mengikut ungkapan mereka berdua bahawa perbezaan antara negara Islam dengan negara kufur adalah berdasar kepada undang-undang mana yang dominan. Apabila undang-undang Islam dominan, maka jadilah ia sebuah negara Islam. Sebaliknya jika undang-undang kufur dominan, maka jadilah ia negara kufur.

Bertolak daripada asas teori di atas, maka kita dapati beliau (Dato Nakhaei) telah menumpukan seluruh perbincangan kepada satu matlamat iaitu membuktikan bahawa wujudnya ciri-ciri negara Islam di Malaysia, kerana dengan adanya beberapa ciri tersebut sudah menjadikan Malaysia sebagai negara Islam Contohnya:

  1. ďIslam adalah agama rasmi negara. Walaupun ada yang mentafsirkan bahawa Islam sebagai agama negara hanyalah berupa adat istiadat seperti membaca doa di dalam majlis-majlis resmi, tetapi hakikatnya dengan adanya kedudukan Islam sebagai agama negara itu, kerajaan boleh membelanjakan wang untuk memajukan pembangunan Islam di negara ini dan membuat rancangan-rancangan bagi kemajuan tersebut secara rasmi,melalui peruntukan yang dibentang dan diluluskan di dalam parlimenĒ ( Kertas Nakhae h.21 )

    Penulis Astora Jabat pernah menyebut bahawa kerajaan Malaysia telah menyediakan dana yang besar untuk pendidikan Islam. Perkara ini sudah tentu tidak dilakukan oleh negara bukan Islam.
  2. Parti-parti politik yang menganggotai Barisan Nasional bersepakat memberi kepercayaan kepada kepimpinan orang Melayu(Islam) untuk menerajui parti dan kerajaan. ( Kertas Nakhae h.21)
  3. Kedaulatan orang Islam kerana orang Islam menguasai jentera kerajaan, polis dan tentera. ( Kertas Nakhae h 21)
  4. Banyak program pembangunan dalam bidang ekonomi Islam telah berjaya memperbaiki tahap dan taraf hidup orang Islam di Malaysia, seperti bank Islam. Dari situ Dato Nakhae menambah bahawa keadaan ini telah dapat memenuhi ciri utama bagi negara Islam yang menetapkan bahawa kekuasaan orang Islam dan kedudukan kukuh agama Islam itu sendiri. (Kertas Nakhae h.21 )

 

  1. Memberikan hak dan kebebasan kepada orang bukan Islam di Malaysia. Orang bukan Islam dapat hidup dengan baik di Malaysia.

Teori kedua: Negara Islam mithali pada zaman Rasulullah s.a.w dan Khulafa al-Rasyidin bukanlah satu ukuran/ciri mutlak dalam penentuan status negara Islam (Kertas Nakhae h. 17). Beliau menyebut:

ďSedangkan negara mithali yang diakui oleh semua sebagai contoh itu, tidaklah menjadi ciri yang mutlak sehingga jika tidak terdapat Teori kedua: Negara Islam mithali pada zaman Rasulullah s.a.w dan Khulafa al-Rasyidin bukanlah satu ukuran/ciri mutlak dalam penentuan status negara Islam (Kertas Nakhae h. 17).

Teori ini dirumuskan daripada kenyataan al-Sarakhsi dalam kitabnya Syarh al-Siyar al-Kabir juz 3 h.61 dan pendapat Bahauddin Muhammad b. Ahmad Asbijabi dalam kitab Ahkam al-Zimmiyyin wa al-Mustaímaninin fi dar al-Islam oleh Dr. Abdul Karim Zaidan, 1963 hh 20-21.

Wan Zahidi Wan Teh juga telah mengutarakan teori ini bersandarkan kenyataan Abu Zuhrah yang menyebut negara Islam ialah negara yang berada di bawah kuasa pemerintah Islam, dengan kekuasaan dan pertahannnya di tangan orang Islam (Kertas Wan Zahidi . h.1)

Metod Kedua: Menggunakan Metod Qiyas

Metod kedua yang digunakan oleh mereka itu ialah qias. Perkara ini dapat dilihat melalui kenyataan berikut:

ďKeadaan yang terdapat di dalam dunia Islam setelah berlalu zaman khulafa al-Rasyidin tidak lagi sebagaimana keadaan di zaman mithali itu. Kualiti kepimpinan lebih rendah, keadaan masyarakat yang berperang sesama sendiri dan berpecah belah, kestabilan politik dan perpecahan yang berlaku tidak menghilangkan status negara sebagai negara Islam. Tidak sesiapa pun di kalangan ulama Islam dahulu dan sekarang , mengeluarkan negara-negara tersebut dari senarai negara-negara Islam (kertas Nakhaei h. 11)Ē

Metod Keempat: Menggunakan metod Perlembagaan Negara

Metod ini merujuk kepada peruntukan 3(1) mengenai kedudukan Agama Islam sebagai Agama Persekutuan. Bagi Wan Zahidi, peruntukan tersebut mengiktiraf Islam sebagai agama rasmi negara. Beliau menyifatkan kedudukan Islam itu sebagai hasil perjuangan UMNO. Dengan peruntukan tersebut beliau menegaskan Malaysia sebagai negara Islam (Kertas Wan Zahidi h 3)



Metod Kelima: Menggunakan Metod Akal dan Logik

Metod akal dan logik juga digunakan untuk menyokong kedudukan Malaysia sebagai negara Islam. Antaranya ialah seperti yang dinyatakan oleh Wan Zahidi .iaitu, jika tidak iktiraf Malaysia sebagai negara Islam, maka bermakna Malaysia termasuk dalam kategori negara kafir, kerana tidak ada pembahagian ketiga yang dibuat oleh fuqaha selain daripada negara Islam dan negara kafir. Sedangkan menganggap Malaysia sebagai negara kafir adalah suatu yang tidak mungkin. Oleh yang demikian nyatalah bahawa Malaysia termasuk dalam kategori negara Islam (Kertas Wan Zahidi h 2)

Selain daripada itu beliau membangkitkan satu lagi logik bahawa jika menganggap negara Malaysia bukan negara Islam, maka tidak wajib mempertahankan negara ini dari pencerobohan musuh negara (Kertas Wan Zahidi h. 2). Sehubungan dengan itu Dato Nakhaei meyimpulkan secara logik bahawa jika dianggap negara seperti Malaysia adalah negara kafir, maka haruslah ditentukan pula samada negara itu negara perang atau negara perjanjian. Katanya, jika negara itu dianggap negara perang, maka diharuskan darah golongan yang memerintah dan para penyokong mereka, walaupun dari kalangan orang Islam, kerana tidak ada lagi hak memelihara darah bagi sesebuah negara dan pemerintah kafir, melainkan jika termasuk dalam negara perjanjian (kertas Nakhaei h. 18)

Metod Keenam: Menggunakan metod munaqasyah dan menolak hujjah pihak kedua

Metod ini digunakan untuk mematikan hujah pihak lawan, seperti alasan Malaysia mengamalkan dasar sekularisme dan asobiyyah yang bercanggah dengan Islam. Dengan itu mereka mengemukakan berbagai-bagai tafsiran bagi menjelaskan konsep sekularisme dan asobiyyah yang ada di Malaysia adalah selaras dengan kehendak Islam.

Huraian panjang lebar tentang sekularisme dan asobiyyah ini telah dijuarai oleh Ust Othman al-Muahmmadi, Fellow Kehormat IKIM. Beliau memetik pandangan dan teori asobiyyah Ibn Khaldun di dalam bukunya al-Muqaddimah bahawa asobiyyah yang ada di Malaysia adalah suatu tuntutan Islam, kerana ia merupakan satu gambaran kekuatan sesuatu bangsa dalam menjalankan pemerintahan dan kekuasaan. Ia tidak ditolak oleh Islam. Sedangkan asobiyyah yang bercanggah dengan Islam ialah dalam perkara kezaliman seperti yang dinyatakan oleh Rasulullah s.a.w .

Manakala sekularisme pula ditafsirkan sebagai satu sikap menolak agama dalam kehidupan, sedangkan apa yang ada di Malaysia bukannya sikap menolak Islam, kerana kedudukan Islam begitu mendapat tempat di dalam masyarakat dan negara Malaysia. Sebab itu tidak timbul soal sekularisme di Malaysia.

Inilah metod dan kaedah serta hujah yang diutarakan oleh ulama yang berada dalam dalam UMNO untuk mendokong kedudukan Malaysia sebagai negara Islam.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Persoalan Kedua: Bagaimanakah pula konsep negara Islam yang dibawa oleh Parti Islam SeMalaysia dan apakah hujah mereka bahawa Malaysia bukan negara Islam

Setakat ini PAS tidak mengeluarkan bahan bertulis secara khusus menolak kedudukan Malaysia sebagai negara Islam, kecuali setelah pengisytiharan negara Islam oleh Dr. Mahathir. Antaranya artikel bertajuk ďApa Ukuran Negara IslamĒ oleh Dr. Dzulkifli Ahmad Pengarah Pusat Penyelidikan PAS disiarkan dalam Harakah 16-31 Okt 2001 Tulisan itu banyak mempersoalkan tentang ketidakwajaran pengisytiharan negara Islam bagi sebuah negara yang mengamalkan unsur kezaliman, penekanan, pencabulan hak dan keadilan, pendakwaan dan penghukuman terpilih dan sebagainya. (Nota Editor - Pas telah mengeluarkan dokumen negara Islam sebelum pilihanraya umum lepas)

Disamping itu artikel itu membuat penegasan yang sama dalam masalah dasar dan perinsip negara Islam sebagaimana yang dinukil daripada kitab Fiqh al-Daulah oleh Syeikh Yusuf al-Qaradhawi. Manakala sebelum itu pemimpin PAS cuma menolak pengisytiharan negara Islam itu melalui ceramah dan kuliah pengajaran. Kenyataan juga dibuat apabila pihak media mengajukan soalan yang berkaitan.

Sebaliknya Para ulama PAS membicarakan pengertian dan konsep negara Islam dalam penulisan mereka tanpa menghurai panjang lebar sejauhmana status negara Islam di Malaysia, contohnya buku Konsep Negara Islam dan Matlamatnya oleh Tuan Guru Haji Abdul Hadi Awang, Timbalan Presiden PAS, buku Model kerajaan Islam oleh YB Haji Haron Taib, Ketua Dewan Ulama PAS Pusat.

Sebab itu kita dapati PAS menolak status Malaysia sebagai negara Islam, berdasarkan teori dan konsep negara Islam yang mereka bincangkan. Jadi inilah satu-satunya metod PAS dalam menyatakan Malaysia bukan negara Islam. Ini berbeza sama sekali dengan UMNO yang telah merangka beberapa metod khusus untuk mengiyakan bahawa Malaysia sebagai negara Islam.

Dalam perbincangan ini, kita akan menumpukan perhatian kepada teori-teori yang menjadi asas kepada konsep negara Islam menurut PAS.

Bagi PAS penentuan negara Islam adalah berdasarkan kaedah/teori Perlembagaan (perundangan), teori kedaulatan Islam, teori kerajaan Islam pada zaman Rasulullah s.a.w dan khulafa al-Rasyidin, teori Agama dan politik tidak boleh dipisahkan, teori sekularisme dan asobiyyah adalah dasar yang bercanggah dengan Islam, teori kepimpinan ulama dan teori tanggungjawab kerajaan Islam

Teori Kerajaan Islam pada zaman Rasulullah s.a.w dan Khulafa al-Rasyidin.

Teori yang paling asas bagi PAS ialah: model kerajaan Islam yang ditegakkan oleh Rasulullah s.a.w dan diteruskan oleh Khulafa al-Rasyidin adalah rujukan utama dalam sistem politik dan kenegaraan. (lihat kenyataan Model kerajaan Islam oleh Haji Harun Taib h.27)

Ini berdasarkan kedudukan Rasulullah s.a.w sebagai pengasas kepada pembentukan negara menurut acuan Islam yang tulin. Identiti kerajaan Islam tersebut telah di teruskan oleh para khulafa al-Rasyidin.Oleh yang demikian segala asas yang ada dalam sistem pemerintahan Rasulullah s.a.w dan khulafa al-Rasyidin adalah suatu kerangka utama yang semestinya ada bagi sebuah kerajaan/negara Islam. Di antara asasnya ialah: perlembagaan,kedaulatan Islam, kepimpinan Islam, kesatuan dan kebajikan umat

Teori Perlembagaan Islam atau Perundangan:

Perlembagaan Negara Islam merupakan undang-undang tubuh bagi sebuah negara. Menurut Tuan Guru Haji Abdul Hadi, negara hendaklah mengucap dua kalimah syahadah melalui peruntukan perlembagaan dengan cara memasukkan peruntukan khusus bahawa undang-undang tertinggi dalam negara ialah Undang-undang Islam. Dengan itu mana-mana undang-undang dan peraturan lain yang bercanggah dengan Islam dikira terbatal. Melalui teori ini , mereka berpendapat bahawa negara Islam ialah negara yang mempunyai perlembagaan Islam sendiri sebagaimana yang dilakukan Rasulullah s.a.w melalui perlembagaan Madinah. Sementara Negara demokrasi pula mempunyai perlembagaan demokrasinya.

Teori Kedaulatan Syariah Islamiyyah

Kedaulatan Syariah Islamiyyah dalam negara bermaksud segala kegiatan pentadbiran dan aktiviti kemasyarakatan tunduk dan patuh kepada peraturan Islam/Syariah. Haji Abdul Hadi menyebut:

Syariat Allah wajib menjadi aqidah negara dan pegangan kerajaannya. Perlembagaan dan segala urusan pemerintahan hendaklah dirujuk kepadanyaĒÖ (Haji Hadi, Konsep Negara Islam h. 8 & 20,21,22dan23 )

Ini bermakna negara menjadikan al-Quran dan al-Sunnah sebagai sumber rujukan tertinggi. Perkara ini juga disandar kepada perjalanan kerajaan Madinah pada zaman Rasulullah s.a.w dan Khulafa al-Rasyidin. Perkara inilah yang diulang berkali-kali oleh Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat Menteri Besar Kelantan, yang juga Mursyid Am PAS.

Haji Haron Taib menyatakan bahawa pemerintahan Islam itu adalah pemerintahan yang berasaskan Agama, sebagaimana yang difahami daripada kata-kata al-Imam al-Ghazali yang bermaksud:

Agama itu asas dan kerajaan itu pengawal. Maka sesuatu yang tidak mempunyai asas akan tumbang dan sesuatu yang tidak ada pengawal akan hilang (buku Model Kerajaan Islam, h 42)

Dalam satu kenyataan lain Haji Harun Taib juga menegaskan teori ini dengan katanya:

ďPemerintahan Islam itu berbentuk khilafah atau imaratul mukminin ataupun al-imamah al-Uzma. Ia merupakan sebuah pemerintahan yang berteraskan kepada syariah Islamiyyah sama ada pada perlembagaannya, undang-undangnya, ekonominya dan lain-lainnyaĒ. (Model Kerajaan Islam h.49)

Teori Kepimpinan Ulamaí dan Tanggungjawab Kerajaan

Kepimpinan negara Islam adalah terdiri daripada barisan para ulama yang berkemampuan dan memenuhi syarat kelayakan menurut konsep kepimpinan Islam.Model ini adalah satu lanjutan daripada sistem pemerintahan Islam pada zaman awal Islam. Haji Harun Taib menyebut:

ďIa merupakan kerajaan yang dipandu oleh para Ulama. Hal ini adalah di dapati daripada beberapa rumusan yang dibuat oleh cendikiawan Islam yang mengatakan bahawa mengetahui syariat Islam sampai kepada peringkat ijtihad adalah salah satu daripada syarat-syarat kelayakan untuk menjadi ketua negara, perdana menteri dan hakim di dalam negara IslamĒ ( Model Kerajaan Islam h. 42)

Beliau menambah lagi bahawa penglibatan para ulama pada zaman Rasulullah s.a.w dan khulafa al-Rasyidin bukan sekadar dalam bidang politik sahaja, malahan menjadi tonggak kepada kepimpinan negara. Sebab itu beliau menegaskan:

ďGolongan ulama bukan sekadar menjadi penasihat kepada negara atau kerajaan, tetapi mereka adalah pemegang polisi dan pelaksana kepada dasar negaraĒ (Model Kerajaan Islam h 43)

Perkara ini dibangkitkan kerana kedudukan ulama dipinggirkan terus dari institusi kuasa dan pemerintahan dalam sistem sekular, sebaliknya ulama hanya diberi peranan sebagai penasihat agama yang jauh lebih rendah kedudukannya darripada penasihat undang-undang moden. Akhirnya ulamaí sendiri berpecah belah sesama mereka.

Dalam konteks ini Haji Abd Hadi merujuk kepada Firman Allah dalam surah al-haj ayat 41 yang menggariskan ciri-ciri asas kepimpinan islam bagi negara Islam, iaitu: (Konsep Negara Islam, h. 38-39)

1. Mendirikan sembahyang dengannya berlakulah hubungan yang kuat di antara masyarakat Islam dengan Allah

2. Memberi zakat, dengannya diberi perhatian kepada masalah ekonomi dan pembahagiannya yang adil

3. Menyuruh yang makruf, menyebarkan kebaikan dan melakukan islah dalam masyarakat

4. Mencegah kemungkaran, memerangi segala bentuk kejahatan, penyelewengan, kezaliman dan maksiat.

Beliau menambah: ďPemerintah yang begitu rupa memerlukan orang yang benar-benar layak, adil dan soleh, mempunyai persediaan ilmu, amal dan peribadi yang mulia. (Haji Abd Hadi h. 39)

Manakala teori tanggungjawab kerajaan pula, mereka merumuskan dua tanggungjawab indduk yang dinyatakan oleh al-mawardi, Ibnu Khaldun, al-Ghazali dan ulamaí yang lain iaitu: hirasah al-Din siyasah al-Dunia bih Ė Penjagaan Agama dan Pentadbiran Dunia menurut Kehendak Agama (Lihat kenyataan Datoí Fadzil Mohd Noor, Presiden PAS dalam Model Kerajaan Islam h. 1)

Inilah asas kepimpinan ulamaí bagi sebuah negara Islam menurut PAS.

Teori Agama dan Politik Tidak Boleh Dipisahkan

ďIslam itu adalah agama yang syumul dan sempurna. Ajarannya mencukupi segala aspek, aqidah, syariah, akhlak dan nizam, menyentuh kerohanian dan kebendaan, kepentingan individu dan masyarakat dan tiap-tiap asppek itu tali menali di antara satu sama lain, tanpa perlaksanaan yang menyeluruh, nescaya gagaal mengatasi semua masalah. Oleh itu wajiblah negara menjalankan sifatnya yang syumul.Ē (Haji Abd Hadi h. 23)

Asas teori ini adalah merujuk kepada kesepaduan antara islam dan urusan pentadbiran. Ia tidak boleh dipisahkan dalam apa keadaan sekalipun. Malah kedua-duanya mestilah berjalan seiringan dalam urusan pemerintahan negara. Asas teori ini akan membezakan negara Islam dengan negara bukan Islam yang memenjarakan Agama dalam instutusi keagamaan semata-mata, sedangkan urusan pentadbiran negara tunduk kepada sistem lain yang bercanggah dengan kehendak Islam

Teori Sekularisme dan Asobiyyah adalah dasar yang bercanggah dengan Islam

PAS juga menolak sekular dan asobiyyah sebagai dasar bagi negara Islam. Apabila ideologi sekular menjadi dasar negara, maka nasib Islam sudah tidak terjamin. Begitu juga apabila asobiyyah menjadi dasar negara, maka berlakulah banyak unsur percanggahan dengan Islam dalam urusan pemerintahan negara. Sebab itu kedua-dua dasar itu tidak boleh menjadi dasar sebuah negara Islam. Keadaan inilah yang berlaku dalam negara bangsa pada zaman moden ini.

Teori ini, bagi PAS, bukan bermaksud menolak sifat cintakan bangsa dan berusaha meninggikan tamaddun bangsa menjadi satu bangsa yang kuat dan maju, tetapi apa yang ditolak oleh mereka ialah tindakan meletakkan kepentingan dan kehendak bangsa mengatasi kehendak dan kepentingan Islam. Dalam konteks inilah Tuan Guru Haji Hadi mengungkapkan kata-katanya yang bermaksud: Jika Islam selamat, bangsa akan selamat, tetapi jika bangsa selamat belum tentu Islam selamat. Begitulah juga jika Islam maju, maka bangsa akan turut maju dan mulia, tetapi kalau bangsa maju belum tentu Islam dapat maju. Sebab itulah Islam mesti dijadikan sebagai dasar, bukannya bangsa dan kebangsaan.

Teori Kesatuan Ummah dan Kebajikan Mereka

Umat Islam adalah rakyat negara Islam yang utama. Mereka hidup brsama rakyat bukan Islam.Umat adalah elemen penting dalam negara Islam kerana mereka merupakan sumber kekuatan negara.

Oleh itu umat adalah pendokong negara Islam yang merealisasikan kehendak persaudaraan dan kesatuan sebagaimana yang dinyatakan oleh firman Allah dalam surah al-Hujurat ayat 10, maksudnya Sesungguhnya orang Islam adalah bersaudara. (Konsep Negara Islam, h 28)

Persoalan Ketiga: Apakah Metod dan Kaedah yang digunakan oleh Ulama Islam silam dalam mentakrifkan sebuah negara Islam, negara kufur/ negara musuh dan negara yang membuat perjanjian dengan negara Islam?

Para Ulama silam telah memberikan beberapa pengertian negara Islam mengikut bidang penekanan masing-masing. Kadang-kadang perbezaan tersebut disebabkan perbezaan dari segi latarbelakang atau tujuan perbincangan yang dibuat. Walaupun secara zahirnya nampak berbeza, namun hakikatnya mereka membawa konsep yang sama tentang negara Islam.

Sehubungan dengan itu didapati Ulama Islam menggunakan sekurang-kurangnya tiga metod dalam menghuraikan makna negara Islam.


 

Metod Pertama ialah Metod Perundangan (Perlaksanaan Undang-Undang Islam)

Di antara contohnya ialah Abu Yusuf dan Muhamad al-Syaibani yang menyebut: Negara Islam adalah negara yang zahir/dominan undang-undang islam di dalamnya. Sebab itu negara yang tidak melaksanakan undang-undang Islam adalah kafir, walaupun orang-orang islam tinggal di negara tersebut. Mereka menggunakan perkataan Zuhur Ahkam al-Islam fiha.

Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi mengatakan: Mana-mana negeri yang penduduknya menerima sistem Islam atau rida dengan Islam tanpa sebarang syarat dan orang zimmi tunduk di bawah kekuasaan Islam ,maka ia sebuah negara Islam (Kitab Usuluddin h 270)

Metod Kedua ialah Metode Politik dan Kepimpinan (sultah)

Sebahagian daripada ulama melihat konsep negara Islam dari sudut kepimpinan dan politik, lalu mentakrifkanya sebagai sebuah negara yang dikuasai oleh para pemimpin Islam seperti yang diutarakan sebelum ini. (Muhammad al-syaibani, Syarh al-Siar al-Kabir juz3 h 81)

Metod Ketiga ialah Metod Kemasyarakatan

Ada juga ulama yang menghuraikan konsep negara Islam dari kaca mata kemasyarakatan, lalu mentakrifkan negara islam sebagai negara yang menjamin keamanan orang islam. Mereka dapat hidup dengan baik ddan selesa.

Mengikut Abu Hanifah sesebuah negara itu hanya akan bertukar menjadi negara kafir dengan wujudnya tiga faktor iaitu: zahirnya undang-undang kufur, bersempadan dengan negara kafir yang mana ia terdedah kepada serangan dan ancaman musuh dan tidak ada unsur perlindungan atau keamanan bagi orang Islam dan zimmi di dalamnya.

Ini bererti sebuah negara tidak dianggap negara kafir selagi tidak lengkap ketiga-tiga syarat itu. Sebaliknya sebuah negara akan dianggap Islam apabila undang-undang Islam zahir dan menonjol di dalamnya. Oleh kerana beliau lebih menekankan kepada aspek keselamatan sosial orang Islam , maka Abu Hanifah tidak menjadikan syarat perlaksanaan Islam sebagai asas dan ukuran utama Negara Islam ., kerana bagi beliau penekanan dari aspek keselamatan itu lebih tepat memandangkan bahawa apabila negara itu tidak bersempadan dengan negara kafir dan orang Islam tidak memerlukan jaminan perlindungan/keselamatan , maka ia memberi erti bahawa undang-undang kafir juga tidak akan menonjol dengan sendirinya.

Maka dengan itu jelaslah jaminan keselamatan itu suatu yang lebih utama dijadikan sebagai asas pengukur. Tetapi jika bersempadan dengan negara kafir dan orang Islam memerlukan jaminan perlindungan, maka yang akan dominan ialah undang-undang kafir.Asas yang dikemukakan oleh Abu Hanifah itu harus difahami secara mendalam, kerana ia tidak memberi maksud selapis iaitu apabila orang Islam aman ,amak negara itu jadi negara Islam. Kalau menggunakan maksud mudah itu, maka negara Amerika, England dan sebagainya jadi negara Islam kerana orang Islam boleh hidup , mencari harta dan beribadat .

Sebenarnya penekanan kepada aspek keselamatan itu bermaksud bahawa sebuah negara Islam tetap menjadi milik umat Islam dan dikira sebahagian daripada wilayah Islam yang mesti terlaksna di dalamnya hukum Islam, selagi tidak memenuhi tiga syarat yang telah dijelaskan.Sebab itu walaupun dalam sebuah negara Islam itu tidak dilaksanakan hukum Islam, ia tetap dianggap sebahagian daripada milik Islam dan tertakluk kepada perlaksanaan hukum Islam. Sebaliknya jika kita telah menganggap negara itu bukan lagi sebahagian daripada negara Islam , maka hukum Islam tidak lagi wajib dilaksanakan seperti orang Islam yang berzina di negeri kafir/harb, atau mencuri atau minum arak atau melakukan fitnah qazaf ,maka hukum Islam tidak dikenakan ke atasnya.

Maka jelas daripada huraian di atas, bahawa Imam Abu Hanifah bukan merendahkan kepentingan perlaksanaan undang-undang Islam di dalam negara apabila beliau mengutamakan asas keselamatan.Sebaliknya asas keselamatan itu digunakan kerana ia lebih menguntungkan kedudukan Islam dalam negara di mana selagi kedudukan orang Islam tetap terjamin/selamat , maka peraturan/undang-undang Islam mesti dikuatkuasakan ke atas penduduknya, disebabkan negara itu masih berada dalam senarai negara Islam.

Walaubagaimanapun secara keseluruhannya daripada perbincangan di atas menunjukkaan bahawa asas keselamatan adalah amat berkait rapat dengan aspek perlaksanaan undang-undang dalam sebuah negara itu seperti yang dijelaskan dalam kitab BadaíI` al-SanaíI` karangan al-Kasani , h 131:

(La tazhar Ahkam al-Kufr illa inda wujud hazain al-Syartain, al-Mutakhmah wa zawal al-aman al-awwal)

Selain daripada itu para ulama silam juga menekankan metod pembebasan dan jihad bagi negara Islam yang jatuh ke tangan musuh.Dari situ mereka mengatakan sebuah negara Yang pernah diperintah oleh Islam tidak gugur status islamnya walaupun dijajah oleh musuh, samada syiar Islam masih kekal atau tidak di dalamnya. Ia tetap menjadi sebahagian daripada negara Islam dan wajib dibebaskan daripada cengkaman musuh yang menjajah.


 

Rumusan metod ulama dalam menentukan konsep negara Islam

Sebenarnya jika merujuk kepada pandangan ulama silam tentang konsep negara Islam, mereka sebenarnya bersetuju dengan satu prinsip utama iaitu: undang-undang Islam dominan di dalamnya. Apa yang menjadi perselisihan di kalangan mereka ialah untuk menentukan bagaimanakan negara Islam boleh bertukar statusnya kepada kafir. Sebab itu sepatutnya disedari bahawa asas teori negara Islam adalah terletak pada aspek kedaulatan Islam dalam sebuah negara kerana asas ini lah yang menjadi paksi negara Islam pertama Madinah yang diterima oleh semua orang sebagai contoh utama. Model negara Madinah adalah contoh terbaik memandangkan model-model lain sudah mengalami perubahan yang menyebabkan sukar untuk mendapat kata sepakat daripada para ulama untuk menerimanya. Sebab itu pengukuran berdasarkan model asal tadi lebih selamat dalam menentukan asas sebenar bagi sebuah negara Islam.

Dari sini jelas menunjukkan bahawa walaupun ada ruang perbezaan di kalangan ulama silam dalam beberapa perkara berbangkit, namun begitu mereka bersetuju bahawa negara Islam adalah negara yang berasaskan undang-undang Islam sebagai undang-undang utama dan tertinggi.

Persoalan keempat: Analisis dan Penilaian terhadap metode yang digunakan oleh UMNO dan PAS

Kedua-dua pihak di atas (UMNO dan PAS) telah mengutarakan asas teori masing-masing mengenai negara Islam. Dalam bahagian ini kita akan meninjau sejauhmana kekuatan asas teori tersebut dari sudut pandangan ilmiah, bagi mencapai satu hala tuju dan kekuatan asas teori sebuah negara Islam

UMNO cuba merangka satu teori asas yang releven dengan realiti semasa iaitu realiti kelemahan sistem politik Islam masa kini . Untuk itu awal-awal lagi teori asas mereka berundur kebelakang supaya tidak dilihat terlalu bercanggah dengan konsep asal negara Islam yang ditegakkan oleh Nabi Muhammad s.a.w. Sebab itu awal-awal lagi UMNO mengelakkan diri daripada mengambil model dan asas kerajaan Madinah dan kerajaan Khulafa al-Rasyidin sebagai rujukan utama. Inilah yang dilakukan oleh Ust Nakhae .Cara ini dapat mengelakkan satu jurang perbezaan yang terlalu besar antara realiti yang ada dengan kosep asal. Keadaan ini akan menyulitkan langkah dan perbincangan mereka.

Sebaliknya PAS tetap berpegang kepada model utama negara Islam dan metod salaf yang menjadikan al-Quran dan al-sunnah sebagai sandaran utama. Apa saja yang ditunjukkan oleh sunnah Rasulullah s.a.w khususnya model kerajaan Islam Madinah dijadiakan asas penting bagi PAS. Walau pun mereka dituduh terlalu ideal dan tidak berpijak kepada realiti, tetapi seolah-olah PAS tidak dapat memisahkan diri daripada metod itu Sebab itu kita dapati para ulama PAS mendahulukan al-Quran dan al-Sunnah sebagai asas utama dalam perbincangan negara Islam. Manakala pandangan para ulama silam dijadikan bahan rujukan kedua dan ketiga bagi mereka.

Metod UMNO di atas walaupun nampak menarik kerana cuba menghidupkan nilai semasa dalam pertimbangan dan kewajaran hukum, namun tanpa disedari mereka terlalu melayani realiti dan kehendak semasa mengatasi tuntutan prinsip dan dasar. Keadaan ini boleh mendedahkan Islam kepada fenomena kecelaruan/fawda, sedangkan asas kekuatan Islam berada pada prinsipnya yang tegas dan tetap.

Ketika mengemukakan teori berikut: ďadanya beberapa ciri negara Islam sudah cukup mengekalkan status negara IslamĒ, Ust Nakahei, dilihat terlalu ghairah untuk menjayakan misi segera negara Islam Malaysia, tanpa menyedari bahawa mereka telah mengabaikan satu asas atau ciri penting yang tidak boleh diketepikan sama sekali, kerana tanpa asas/ciri ini , maka ciri-ciri lain tidak memberi apa-apa makna. Mereka mengabaikan asas yang paling pokok dan tunggak kepada sistem Islam iaitu bersumberkan al-Quran dan al-Sunnah. Tanpa kedua-dua tapak ini, maka binaan sistem politik Islam tidak akan dapat ditegakkan. Perkara ini ditegaskan oleh Prof. Datoí Mahmood Zuhdi dalam kenyataannya: ďIni bererti pemakaiannya (siasah syar`iyyah) hanya akan berbangkit jika pemerintahan itu berdasarkan kepada sistem pemerintahan Islam seperti difahami daripada al-Quran dan sunnahĒ ( jurnal Syariah,jilid 2 bil.2 1994, h.38)

Ini adalah asas kepada segala teori-teori lain berkenaan dengan negara Islam, kerana dengan adanya asas ini barulah teori lain dapat berperanan dengan sebaiknya seperti sembahyang merupakan tiang kepada ibadat yang lain. Tanpa sembahyang apalah guna ibadat yang lain.

Ketiadaan asas ini dikenalpasti sebagai faktor utama kepada kecelaruan tafsiran Islam yang dipakai dalam negara moden sekarang yang benar-benar menyeleweng daripada maksud sebenar Islam. Tetapi jika asas teori ini mantap, maka Islam tidak terdedah kepada permainan dan tafsiran yang salah dan mengelirukan. Semua pihak mengakui bahawa Islam yang disebut sebagai agama Persekutuan telah ditafsirkan sebagai agama untuk upacara rasmi sahaja. Islam yang ada itu tidak diberikan tafsiran yang sebenar dalam perlaksanan undang-undang , kerana sumber undang-undang yang menajdi asas teori politik Islam tidak diberi tempatnya yang sewajarnya.

Apabila ulama UMNO terlupa untuk membicarakan perkara yang paling pokok ini, maka ia merupakan satu kepincangan yang nyata, seolah-olah mereka hanya bertindak secara terbatas. Lebih-lebih lagi mereka tidak berani mengemukakan aspek kelemahan yang berlaku secara adil dan terbuka, sebaliknya menyenaraikan ciri-ciri yang baik sahaja.Perkara ini tidak wajar berlaku dalam disiplin ilmu.


 

Dari segi metod qias di dapati ulama UMNO kurang cermat dan tidak mendalam kerana kedudukan kerajaan Umayyah tetap diakui oleh ulama Islam sebagai negara Islam kerana ciri asas negara Islam tadi masih kekal sebagaimana yang dinyatakan oleh Ibn Khaldun dan disokong oleh Dr. Diya al-Din al-Rais. (al-Nazariyyat al-siyassiyyah al-Islamiyyah h.194-195) Sedangkan negara bangsa zaman moden ini telah hapus sama sekali kedaulatan sumber undang-undang (Quran dan snnah ) sebagai rujukan utama dalam seluruh urusan pentadbiran, kecuali urusan perkahwinan dan ibadat. Apa yang ada hanya pengakuan kosong seperti yang dinyatakan oleh al-Quran surah al-Nisaí ayat 60, maksudnya: Apakah kamu tidak memperhatikan orang-orang yang mengaku dirinya telah beriman kepada apa yang diturunkan kepadamu dan kepada apa yang diturunkan sebelum kamu? Mereka hendak berhakim kepada taghut, padahal mereka telah diperintah mengingkari taghut itu. Dan syaitan bermaksud menyesatkan mereka dengan penyesatan yang sejauh-jauhnya.

Daripada perbincangan di atas nampaknya teori-teori asas negara Islam yang dibawa oleh PAS agak sukar untuk ditolak, kerana merangkumi dasar dan prinsip kepada pembentukan negara Islam sebagaimana yang ditunjukkan oleh al-Quran dan al-Sunnah. Cuma sejauhmana mereka mampu merealisasikannya dalam kenyataan !!. Ini boleh dijadikan satu lagi asas perbincangan diperingkat perlaksanaan, bukannya konsep dan dasar. Sebab itu, teori yang diutarakan PAS telah dapat memenuhi kehendak konsep dan dasar.

Sebenarnya teori-teori asas negara Islam yang dipegang oleh PAS telah diutarakan oleh Ust Nakhaei semasa beliau menjadi pimpinan tertinggi PAS melaluinya bukunya: Penghayatan Politik Islam Dalam Pemerintahan. Melalui buku itu beliau telah menegaskan bahawa Negara Islam ditegakkan di atas dasar kedaulatan hukum Allah,kekuasaan ummah, dasar keadilan,syura, tanggungjawab pemerintah dan ketaatan rakyat. Buku tersebut bertujuan menolak program Islamisasi kerana dikatakan tidak bertepatan dengan kehendak Islam sebenar. Beliau mengungkapkan satu kenyataan tegas berikut: ďWALAUPUN TERDAPAT SEKARANG INI BEBERAPA RANCANGAN YANG BERFAEDAH DARI SEGI ISLAM DAN DITEGASKAN DI ATAS NAMA ISLAM SEPERTI BANK ISLAM, NAMUN IA TIDAK DAPAT MENGUBAH SIFAT DAN STRUKTUR NEGARA INI SEBAGAI NEGARA SEKULAR YANG TIDAK MENDAULATKAN HUKUM-HUKUM ALLAHĒ (Nakhaei h.5)

Persoalan kelima: Apakah sebenarnya status negara Malaysia menurut pandangan ilmu Politik Islam? Apa sikap politik Islam terhadap polemik ini?

Bagi politik Islam , polemik ilmiah di atas antara PAS dan UMNO dapat diterima sebagai positif, kerana dapat menyubur/ memeriahkan dunia pemikiran politik Islam di Malaysia dan dapat membangunkan teori politik Islam yang berguna untuk negara dan masyarakat.

Namun begitu agak mendukacitakan apabila tindakan yang ganas dan keras dikenakan ke atas beberapa pihak tanpa memberi ruang yang cukup untuk berbincang dan bertukar pandangan, sedangkan suasana perbincangan itu lebih meriah dan memberangsangkan alam pemikiran dan keilmuan. Tangkapan dan sekatan tidak membantu alam pemikiran yang kita bincangkan ini, kecuali setelah peluang terbuka luas tidak dipergunakan dengan baik.

Terdapat dua persoalan yang memerlukan penelitian politik Islam dalam isu negara Islam:

Pertama: Apakah mampuu kita tegakkan sesuatu perkara besar seperti negara islam dengan hanya menumpang prinsip politik asing seperti demokrasi dan mengharapkan ihsan pihak tertentu untuk memberikan laluan dan layanan baik kepada islam? Perkara ini sudah terbukti kesukarannya, kerana prinsip politik moden sepertti demokrasi mempuunyai falsafah dan misi agongnya sendiri yang tidak secucuk dengan Islam. Adakah Islam terlalu lemah untuk mengemukakan falsafah dan prinsip politiknya sendiri?

Kedua: Sikap melarikan diri daripada panduan dan petunjuk Rasulullah SAW dalam sistem politik akan membawa kepada satu polemik dan perdebatan yang tidak akan berkesudahan , kerana teori-teori baru akan menghadapi kesukaran untuk memperolehi kata sepakat, disebabkan ianya telah dipengaruhi oleh berbagai suasana dan kepincangan. Sebaliknya pertunjuk Rasulullah s.a.w dalam soal politik memang diakui oleh semua. Mengapa kita sengaja meninggalkan asas persepakatan kepada sandaran yang tidak sepakat? Jawabalah persoalan ini. Sekali lagi kita akan berjumpa jawapan kepada masalah yang kita hadapi.

Negara Islam hanya satu, bukan dua, tiga atau empat. Negara Islam adalah negara yang mendaulatkan Islam dalam pemerintahannya. Manakala ciri-ciri lain hanya boleh dibincangkan setelah asas ini dapat diselesaikan dengan baik oleh para penganalisis.

Apabila disedari kepincangan yang ada, maka langkah membetulkan kelemahan adalah tanggungjawab seluruh umat Islam, kerana tidak berbangkit kenyataan bahawa jika negara itu bukan negara Islam maka halal darahnya. Yang berbangkit sekarang ialah kepincangan itu mesti diperbetulkan dan penduduknya perlu disedarkan, ulamanya perlu ditegur dan sebagainya. Inilah langkah bijak untuk menyelamatkan negara dan tanahair kita yang tercinta daripada kehancuran yang ditujukan kepada umat yang tidak mendaulatkan ajaran Islam.

Apa yang sepatutnya disedari ialah kelemahan negara umat Islam sekarang ialah kerana mereka berpecah lantaran masing-masing bertuankan sistem yang asing daripada Islam. Akhirnya kesatuan umat terhakis, kekuatan umat berkecai, masing-masing negara tidak membantu umat Islam yang diceroboh . Sekiranya umat Islam bersatu dengan al-Quran dan al-Sunnah , maka mereka tidak mudah dipecahbelahkan dan ditindas.

Sebab itu kita tidak boleh menganggap remeh persoalan dasar dan prinsip sebagai isu-isu teknikal atau persoalan-persolaan kulit. Inilah kepincangan pemikiran Islam moden yang gagal memberikan hak kepada asasnya yang sebenar, semata-mata mahu mengejar keunggulan yang direstui oleh barat.


Sekian , Wassalam.

Senarai Rujukan:

Haji Haron Taib, Model Kerajaan Islam , Dewan Ulama Pas Pusat K. Lumpur, 2000.

Haji Abdul Hadi Awang, Konsep Negara Islam dan Matlamatnya, GG Edar, Kuala Lumpur,1986

Haji Nakhaie Haji Ahmad, Penghayatan Politik Islam Dalam Pemerintahan, GG Edar, K. Lumpur, 1987

Dr. Abdul Karim Zaidan, al-Fard wa al-Dawlah fi al-Syariah al-Islamiyyah,

Muhammad Atiyyah Khamis al-Muhami, Perlembagaan Islam (terjemahan oleh Ust Yahya haji Othman) K. Lumpur, 1982

Abdul Rahman Ibn Khaldun, Al-Muqaddimah ,Beirut (t.t)

Dr. Arif Khalil Abu Iid, Nizam al-Hukm fi al-Islam, Urdun 1996

Dr. Diyaí al-Din al-Rais, al-Nazariyyat al-Siyasiyyah al-Islamiyyah, Kaherah,1976

Datuk Haji Nakhaie bin haji Ahmad, Jihad Guru Agama Dalam Pembangunan Bangsa Melayu dan Pembentukan Negara Islam Maju, (Kertas kerja dbentangkan dalam Kursus Khas Perdana (Pendidikan Islam) fasa I Pada 22 Mei 2001, Di Kuala Lumpur.

Wan Zahidi bin Wan Teh , Malaysia Daulah Islamiah, Kertas kerja dibentangkan sempena perjumpaan YAB Perdana Menteri

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE CONCEPT OF ISLAMIC STATE  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday, 18 May 2004

Islamic state is a most discussed subject both among supporters as well as among its opponents. Is there any such concept? Can we call any state an Islamic state? There are many claimants of course. Interestingly among the claimants are military dictators as well as monarchs. Can we legitimately call it an Islamic state? Is there any such criterion to judge the claim? If so, what is that criterion? Generally some ritualistic aspects of Islam like prayer, fasting, zakat etc. are imposed in addition to the Islamic punishments to lay claim to the Islamic state. Will it be enough of a criterion?

First of all we should know whether there is any concept of Islamic state in the Qur'an or Hadith literature. A thorough examination of the scripture and Hadith literature shows that there is no such concept of Islamic state. In fact after the death of the Holy Prophet the Muslims were not agreed even on the issue of his successor. The Muslims split on the question - a section maintaining that the Prophet (PBUH) never appointed any successor and another section maintaining that he did.

As far as the Qur'an is concerned there is, at best, a concept of a society rather than a state. The Qur'an lays emphasis on 'adl and ihsan i.e. justice and benevolence. A Qur'anic society must be based on these values. Also, the Qur'an strongly opposes zulm and 'udwan i.e. oppression and injustice. No society thus based on zulm and 'udwan can qualify for an Islamic society. The Qur'anic values are most fundamental. It is thus debatable whether a state, declaring itself to be an Islamic state, can be legitimately accepted as such without basing the civil society on these values. We will throw more light on this later.

First of all it is important to note that the pre-Islamic Arab society had not known any state structure. It was a predominantly a tribal society which did not know any distinction between a state and a civil society. There was no written law, much less a constitution. There was no governing authority either hereditary or elected. There was a senate called mala'. It consisted of tribal chiefs of the tribes in the area. Any decision taken had to be unanimous and the tribal chiefs enforced the decision in their respective tribes. If a tribal chief dissented, the decision could not be implemented.

There was no taxation system nor any police or army. There was no concept of territorial governance or defense or policing. Each tribe followed its own customs and traditions. There were of course inter-tribal wars and all adult tribals took part in defending ones tribal interests. The only law prevalent was that of qisas i.e. retaliation. The Qur'an put it succinctly as "And there is life for you in retaliation, O men of understanding. " (2:179) The whole tribal law and ethic in pre-Islamic Arabia was based on the law of retaliation.

The Islamic movement in Mecca inherited this situation. When the Prophet and his companions faced severe persecution in Mecca they migrated to Madina also known as Yathrib. Madina was also basically a tribal city governed by tribal laws. Like Mecca in Madina too, there was no state and only tribal customs and traditions prevailed. In fact Madina was worse in a way than Mecca. In Mecca inter-tribal wars were not much in evidence as it was turning into a commercial society and inter-tribal corporations for trade were coming into existence. However, Madina, being an oasis, was a semi- agricultural society and various tribes were at daggers drawn. It was to get rid of the inter-tribal warfare that the people of Madina invited the Holy Prophet as an arbitrator.

The Prophet, a great spiritual and religious personality, commanded great respect and set out to establish a just society in Madina. First of all he drew up a pact between various tribal and religious groups known as Mithaq-i-Madina (i.e. the Medinese treaty) which guaranteed full autonomy to all tribes and religious groups like the Jews, the Muslims and other pagan tribes. Thus all religious groups were free to follow their own law and tradition and there was no coercion in such matters. The Holy Qur'an also declared that "there is no compulsion in the matter of religion" (2:256). The Mithaq-i-Madina was a sort of preliminary constitution of the `state' of Madina which went beyond a tribal structure and transcended the tribal boundaries in matters of common governance. It also laid down that if Madina is attacked by an outside force all will defend it together. Thus for the first time a concept of common territory so necessary for a state to operate, was evolved. Before this, as pointed out earlier, there was concept of tribal but not of territorial boundaries.

The Prophet, in a way, took a revolutionary step, in dissolving tribal bonds and laying more emphasis on ideological boundaries on one hand, and territorial boundaries, on the other. However, the Prophet's aim was not to build a political community but to build a religious community instead. If Muslims evolved into a political community it was accidental rather than essential. Hence the Qur'an lays more emphasis on values, ethic and morality than on any political doctrines. It is Din which matters most than governance. Allah says in the Qur'an that al-yauma akmaltu lakum dinakum (i.e. I have perfected your Din today, 5:3). Thus what the Qur'an gives us is a perfect din, not a perfect political system. The political system had to evolve over a period of time and in keeping with the needs and requirements.

One of the basic duties of the Muslims is "enforcing what is good and combating what is evil". This clearly gives a moral and spiritual direction to an Islamic society. The later emphasis on integral association between religion and politics is, to the best of my knowledge, totally absent in the Holy Qur'an. The Prophet was an enforcer of good par excellence and he devoted his life to eradicating evil from society. But he never aspired for political power. He was one of the great spiritual persons born on this earth. He strove to inculcate spiritual power among his companions. The following verse of the Qur'an enunciates the basic philosophy of the Muslim community. "You are the best ummah (nation, community) raised up for people: you enjoin good and forbid evil and you believe in Allah." (3:109)

Thus it will be seen that the basic task of the Muslim ummah is to build a moral society based on good and negation of evil. The unity of Muslims is possible only if they remain basically a religious community engaged in building a just society which has no elements of zulm (oppression and injustice), though there may be different ways of approaching the truth. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said that a society can persist with kufr (unbelief) but not with zulm (injustice). The Qur'an also describes Allah as Ahkam al-Hakimin (i.e. best of the Judges, 95:8). These are all value-giving injunctions and hence give a direction to the society.

Islam never required Muslims to evolve into a political community. Politics leads people basically to power-seeking projects and aspirations for power brings about division rather than unity. The Qur'an required Muslims to remain united and not entertain disputes weakening themselves. "And obey Allah and His Messenger", the Qur'an says, "and dispute not one with another, lest you get weak-hearted and your power depart, and be steadfast. Surely Allah is with the steadfast." (8:46)

When some one aspires for political power they dispute with each other and thus become weak which is what Muslims have been warned against. And in the history of Islam the dispute between Muslims arose on the question of political power. Who should wield political power and who should rule was the main question after the death of the Holy prophet. Thus Muslims began to divide on the question of power.

Various disputes arose between different groups of Muslims even leading to bloodshed during the thirty years of what is known in Islamic history as khilafat-i-Rashidah (period of the rightly guided rule). This thirty year period is full of conflict and bloodshed. Three rightly guided Caliphs out of four were assassinated. Why the spirit of unity was lost? Why wars broke out between different groups and parties? It was mainly on account of fights between different aspirants for power and pelf. The first signs of these aspirations appeared immediately after the death of the Holy Prophet.

The people of Mecca belonging to the tribe of Quraysh claimed their superiority over others and said that an Imam can only be from the tribe of Quraysh as they first embraced Islam and they were most cultured and cultivated with adequate experience. The supporters of the Prophet from Madina the Ansars, on the other, claimed that it is they who helped the Prophet when he was driven out of Mecca due to severe persecution by the people of Quraysh and hence they better deserve to succeed the prophet. the Imam or Caliph, they claimed should be from amongst the Ansars. The members of the family of the Prophet (PBUH) felt that 'Ali, the son-in-law of the Prophet and leader of the Hashimites, was better qualified to succeed the prophet.

Thus these fissures appeared as different groups aspired for leadership and consequently for power associated with the'nascent Muslim state. It is also necessary to stress here that a preliminary state structure came into existence because it was historical and not religious need. We would like to elaborate this a bit.

As every Muslim knows the religious duties of Muslims are to pray, fast, pay the poor due (zakat), perform Haj and believe in tawheed (unity of Allah) and not associate aught with Him. This is necessary for spiritual control over oneself. A Muslim can perform these obligations wherever he/she lives. There is no need for an Islamic state for this. A Muslim living in a non-Muslim society can perform these obligations without let or hindrance. And even when there is Muslim rule no ruler can forcibly enforce these obligations on Muslims. Matters of 'ibadat (i.e. acts of worship and spiritual exercises) cannot be coercively enforced by any authority. It is a matter between human beings and Allah.

However, it is different matter as far as mu'amalat (i.e. relations between human beings) are concerned. A state has to govern these mu'amalat and ultimate aim of the state is to set up a society based on justice and benevolence ('adl and ihsan in the Qur'anic terms). 'Adl and 'ihsan are most fundamental human values and any state worth its salt has to strive to establish a society based on these values. But for this no particular form of state is needed. Even an honest monarch can do it. It is for this reason that the holy Qur'an praises prophet-rulers like Hazrat Da'ud and hazrat Sulayman who were kings but Allah's Prophet's too. Even Queen Bilquis is praised for her just governance in the Qur'an though she was not a prophet herself.

But the Qur'an is also aware that such just rulers are normally far and few in between. The governance has to be as democratic as possible so that all adults could participate in it. If governance is left to an individual, or a monarch, the power may corrupt him or her as everyone knows absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is for this reason that the Qur'an refers to democratic governance when it says: "And those who respond to their Lord and keep up prayer, and whose affairs are (decided) by mutual consultation, and who spend out of what We have given them" (42:38). Thus the mutual affairs (those pertaining to governance) should be conducted only by mutual consultation which in contemporary political parlance will be construed as democratic governance. Since in those days there was no well defined practice of political democracy, the Qur'an refers to it as `amruhum shura' baynahum i.e. affairs to be conducted through mutual consultation which is very meaningful way of hinting at democracy. The Qur'an is thus against totalitarian or monarchical rule.

Here a problem may arise as far as the Shi'ah sects are concerned. They believe in the theory of imamah i.e. only an Imam from the progeny of the Prophet's son-in-law and his daughter Fatima can inherit the Prophet (PBUH). The Shi'ahs, in other words, reject the concept of khilafah i.e. succession to the Prophet through election by the people. The right to succession is confined only to the members of the Prophet's family and it is available to no one else. It is no doubt the very basis of the Shi'ah tradition and faith.

But this hardly changes the ethos of governance. The state in Iran is today a democratically elected one. The President of Iran and the Majlis (parliament) are elective in nature. In todays world there is no question of a ruler coming from the Prophet's family. It was a different matter when the controversy arose immediately after the death of the holy Prophet. A group of people then did feel that Hazrat Ali, the son-in law of the Prophet who was rigorously just, who had fought and won many an Islamic battle, who was one of the bravest and most honest person should have succeeded the Prophet. He was qualified for good governance in ways more than one. Apart from being just, honest and brave, he was most learned as well. The holy Prophet had described him as gateway to the city of knowledge, Prophet being the city of knowledge himself. He was also greatly confident of his knowledge. He often used to say saluni qabla tafquduni i.e. ask me before you loose me.

In such circumstances it is not surprising that many people felt that Ali was much more qualified to succeed the Prophet than any one else. His two sons Hasan and Husain were also eminently qualified as they too were inheritors of the virtues and qualities of the Prophet, they having been trained and brought up by the Prophet and Ali. No one else has such an excellent opportunity to have been so intimately connected to the Prophet and the whole Islamic atmosphere around him.

In fact the theory of Imamah was based on this certainty of correct religious guidance on one hand, and, a guarantee for good and just governance, on the other. It is this inner certitude which gave rise to the belief that the members of the Prophet's family are most suited to guide and govern. The Shi'ahs moreover believe that the imams were infallible and can do no wrong. But two things are again important to note here. The governance by imam also could not be absolute in personal terms, much less dictatorial or authoritarian. The Imam will also have to consult the representative of the people as per the Qur'anic injunction in 3:158 in which even the Prophet (PBUH) is required to consult them.

This verse i.e. 3:158 is very important verse in laying down the guidance for governance. It is a divine statement against dictatorship or authoritarianism. The verse reads: "Thus it is by Allah's mercy that thou art gentle on them. And hadst thou been rough, hard-hearted, they would certainly would have dispersed from around thee. So pardon them and ask protection for them, and consult them in (important matters)..." Thus a ruler has to be gentle, not hard-hearted and rough and has to act in consultation with the representatives of the people. This verse has been addressed to the Prophet and no imam from his family can deviate from this divine injunction.

Thus even an imam from the Prophet's family cannot be absolutist and has to base his rule on democratic principles. Thus even the Shi'ah theory of imamah cannot lead to absolutist or purely personal rule. Also, an imam can be infallible in religious matters, in laying down religious rulings. But in all secular and worldly matters he will be bound by democratic structures of governance.

Secondly, the theory of imamah was much more relevant as far as the close relatives of the Prophet who lived either with him or very close to his period, was concerned. Today, more than fourteen hundred years after the death of the holy Prophet, no one can claim such physical closeness to the Prophet and its resultant benefits. And even within the first century of the Prophet's death there were many claimants for the office of Imam and the Shi'ahs were divided into number of sects and sub-sects what of today fourteen hundred years after the death of the Prophet who can determine the authenticity of the claimant to the office of the imamah? The twelve Shi'ahs and also the Isma'ili-Mustalian Shi'ahs believe in seclusion of their respective imams. No wonder than that Iran has adopted the elective principle of governance which is what is the ultimate aim of the Islamic scripture.

Also, once Islam spread to vast areas of the world outside the confines of Arabia new ethnic and racial groups were added to its fold. This proved both the strength as well as weakness of the Islamic society. Strength as far as rich diversity was concerned and weakness as far as complex problem and group conflicts it gave rise to. The group conflicts got greatly intensified even within the limited period of Khilafat-i-Rashidah which lasted for slightly less than thirty years.

During this period number of groups came into existence. The most powerful group was of the tribe of Quraysh who were muhajirs (immigrants) to Madina to which they migrated along with, or after the Prophet, to avoid persecution in Mecca. They claimed to be the sabiqun al-awwalun i.e. those who responded to the call of Islam earlier than others and also belonged to the tribe of the Prophet. After the death of the Prophet they also came out with the doctrine that the Khilafat be confined to the tribe of Quraysh. However, the Quraysh were divided into several clans of which the clans of Hashim (to which the Prophet himself belonged) and of Banu Umayyah were at loggerheads. Among the Qurayshites the Hashimites and the Umayyads fought against each other for the leadership of the nascent Muslim state. Ali and his sons (particularly Hasan and Husain) who were claimants to the leadership all belonged to the clan of Banu Hashim.

Then there were Ansars i.e. those who belonged to the tribes of Aws, Khazraj of Madina and who had helped the Prophet by swearing allegiance to the Prophet and helping him (hence Ansars i.e. helpers) migrate to Madina and supporting him vis-a-vis his powerful opponents. The Ansars also claimed leadership of the state after the death of the Prophet on the basis that they had helped the Prophet and that without their help his mission would not have survived. But the Qurayshites strongly resisted their claim to the Khilafat. Then the leaders of the Ansars proposed a compromise and said let one from the Quraysh and one from the Ansars share the leadership but this was also turned down by the Qurayshites that it would lead to more conflict and confusion.

The third group was of those Muslims who embraced Islam from amongst the conquered non-Arab peoples of Iraqi or Persian or Egyptian or Syrian origins. The emphasis of Islam on justice and equality of all believers was great attraction for these non-Arab peoples. In course of a few years large number of non-Arabs, most of them belonging to weaker sections of society converted to Islam and demanded equal treatment. But despite strong emphasis of Islam on equality of all believers irrespective of their social status, nationality, colour or race, the ruling classes among Muslims were not prepared to accord equal treatment to them. Most of the Muslims were accepted Muslims only when they were made mawla (affiliate or associate) of a tribe. Kufa and Basra in Iraq, Egypt, Damascus etc. became centres of these non-Arab Muslims. Many of these non-Arab people were those captured in various wars.

As for the first group i.e. the Qurayshites, they wielded power with the second group of Ansars being their co-partners. These groups were contented to a great extent though some sub-groups were not. The Hashimites, for example, were a discontented group among the Qurayshites as the non-Hashimites had captured power. Similarly among the Ansars who were initially the allies of the Quraysh, the younger generation among them felt neglected.

The fact that the second Caliph was assassinated by a discontented non-Arab slave on the dispute about wages to be paid to him, showed the beginning of the dissidence in early Islamic society. It reached its peak during the period of 3rd Caliph Hazrat Usman when the non-Arab people from Egypt, Kufa and Basra surrounded his house and murdered him in presence of his wife when he was reciting the Holy Qur'an. Dr. Taha Husain in his book Al-fitnah al-Kubra (The Great Insurrection) has dealt with this problem. This uprising against Hazrat Usman was result of deep discontent found among them as they felt completely neglected and found themselves discriminated against.

Islam had tried to usher in a just society based on compassion, sensitivity towards other fellow human beings, equality and human dignity. However, the well entrenched vested interests, though pay lip service to these values, in practice sabotage them in various ways and continue to impose their own hegemony. The weaker sections and the downtrodden attracted by the revolutionary thrust of Islam and its sensitivity towards them, felt disillusioned and revolted. This revolt brought about near anarchy in society and resulted in civil war in which thousands were killed.

There was yet another group of Bedouins who lived in desert and resented the hegemony of the urban elite. They considered the Khilafat as an urban rule imposed on them. They were not accustomed to submission to any authority. Thus in the Battle of Camel fought between the fourth Caliph Hazrat Ali and Amir Mu'awiyah, the bedouins seceded from the army of Hazrat Ali and raised the slogan "al-hukmu lillah" (i.e. Rule of Allah). They adopted extreme postures and caused much bloodshed in the early history of Islam.

Ultimately the Umayyads captured power and Khilafah was converted into monarchy. Maulana Abul A'ala Maududi has thrown detailed light on it in his book Khilafat aur Mulukiyyat. Thus we see that the Islamic society went through great deal of turmoil and bloodshed and could not evolve a universally acceptable form of state. When the Abbasids overthrew Umayyads in the first half of the second century of Islam, there again was great deal of bloodshed. When the Abbasids captured power, some Umayyads fled to Spain and established their own rule there. Now there were two Caliphs simultaneously in the Islamic world. Earlier the theory was that there could be only one Caliph or Imam at a time. Now that theory had to be revised in view of the empirical reality and two Caliphs at a time were accepted. But still later at the end of 2nd century of Islam the Fatimid Imams established their rule in Egypt and now there were several rulers at a time in the Islamic world.

The Abbasid Caliphs were also reduced to nominal heads of the state as the Buwayhids and Saljuqs captured powered and wielded real authority. They came to be known as Sultans, the real power behind the Abbasid caliphs. The Islamic political theory had to undergo change again. Now by and large non-Quraysh were wielding power and hence the theory of Quraysh alone becoming caliph had to be abandoned. Earlier the Kharijites (Seceders) who were mainly Bedouins and hence non-Qurayshites had rejected the theory that only a Quraysh could become the caliph.

Thus we see that the political theory of Islam had to undergo frequent changes to accommodate the empirical reality. It is, therefore, not possible to talk of an 'Islamic State' with a sense of finality. It is extremely difficult task to evolve any ijma' (consensus of Muslims) on the issue. Today also there are several Muslim countries with as varied forms of state as monarchical to dictatorial or semi-dictatorial to democratic. All these states, however, call themselves as 'Islamic State'.

The forms and structures of state are bound to vary from place to place and time to time. It would be very difficult, for example, to create a democratic state in a feudal society. Thus the Qur'an does not give much importance to the form of state but greatly emphasises the nature of society. While the state is contingent the society based on values like justice, equality, compassion and human dignity is a necessity in Islam. And needless to say in our time it is only a democratic state with widest possible power-sharing arrangement which can guarantee such a society.

Also, as per the Qur'anic teachings the Islamic state should guarantee equal rights to all ethnic, racial, cultural, tribal and religious groups. The Qur'an considers racial, national, tribal and linguistic differences as signs of Allah and indicative of identity (see 30:22). It also accepts the right of other religious communities to follow their own religion and it also accords equal status to men and women (see 33:35 and 2:228). The Qur'an accepts plurality in society as will of Allah (5:48).

Thus in view of all this an Islamic state should have following characteristics: 1) It should be absolutely non-discriminatory on the basis of race, colour, language and nationality; 2) it should guarantee gender equality; 3) it should guarantee equal rights to all religious groups and accept plurality of religion as legitimate and 4) lastly it should be democratic in nature whose basic premise will be human dignity (17:70). Only those states which fulfill these criteria can be construed to be Islamic in nature. Thus an Islamic state is the very epitome of modern democratic pluralistic state.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IDEALS OF THE ISLAMIC STATE  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday, 18 May 2004

Abstract

This paper deals with the legal and moral themes upon which the ideals of an Islamic state are founded. It will be shown that the basis of such a government is sovereignty of God and a divine immutable law. By this, it is meant that the role of man and man-made institutions is limited, as far as law and rulership is concerned, to its interpretation and application. A brief analysis of the divine law is presented and investigated from the point of view of justice within the law, the scope of rights of the individual and of the community, the role of the ruler and government itself and the type of society that such rule is meant to foster. The role of morality and Islamic ethics is investigated, both in safeguarding individual rights as well as in providing an imperative to the rulership.

 

 

Human rights and personal freedom as applied to secular state are briefly reviewed and then discussed in the context of an Islamic state. Democracy is discussed in its contemporary application, its role in achieving the aspirations of society and state and the extent to which it is compatible with Islam.

1. Islamic rulership

It is important to state at the outset that the author does not believe that an idealised Islamic state exists in contemporary times. Whilst Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other nations have attempted to create a framework of such a state, the author believes that they have only incorporated some Islamic rulings into their otherwise secular state machinery. The purpose of this study is not to provide the basis for such a framework, but to highlight certain specific features that an idealised Islamic state would have. For the purposes of this dissertation, the definitions of what constitutes Islamic theory and practice is taken from the Qur'an and other Islamic sources of the classical Islamic period1 that espouse the Shi'a Fatimi Isma'ili thought of Islam. This school known for an uncompromising development of the monotheist fundamentals of Islam and for the establishment of the Fatimid khalifat (caliphate) that ruled from Egypt in the 10th to 12th centuries. Thus the arguments put forward here may not all necessarily concur with the generally accepted view of Islam.

The idealised Islamic state is not utopian, in that it does not espouse near impossible themes that have little bearing to reality. Islamic states did once exist and can function again in contemporary times, provided the requirements of a contemporary Islamic state are understood and appropriately developed from the fundamentals that already exist within the Islamic polity.

A comparison between the modern secular state and the ideal Islamic state is unavoidable as an investigation of differences in the application of familiar themes in both systems is a useful way of understanding the basis of an Islamic state.

1.1 Potency of politics in Islam

It is a well-known fact that Islam has a value-system applicable to government and politics. This is a powerful theme that raises spontaneous opposition from the West due to the West's own historical experience of the renaissance when the state and church were painfully separated. However, there a number of reasons which compel Muslims, even those who are aware of the Western experience, to consider politics, even modern politics, as being part of practical Islam. These are:

  1. Islam does not separate the secular from the spiritual2. It is a comprehensive way of life. To this effect, it provides man with theoretical and practical guidance covering all aspects of life, of which the political aspect is but one. The world, in its view, is a place of preparation of the soul for the hereafter and that this preparation fulfils the purpose of creation of man. One cannot therefore consider parts of worldly life as having no meaning with regards to that final purpose.
  2. The majority of Islamic injunctions apply to the Islamic ummah3 rather than the individual. The importance of society and laws governing social interaction in Islam therefore becomes obvious. The rulership of such a society requires Islam to provide guidelines for the establishment of a just government and the running of the state machinery.
  3. When Prophet Muhammad established the first Islamic state in the city of Madinah, he personally laid down principles by which an Islamic state would run, including the unity of religious, political and legal institutions. The idea of that original Islamic state, governed by a perfect ruler enjoying direct communion with God has remarkable potency for the Muslim even after fourteen hundred years.
  4. The Islamic world was ruled for at least five centuries by some form of Islamic government partly or fully based on the original idealised model. A vast amount of material for such governship thus exists in the classical literature. There is a great attraction in looking into these texts to find means of developing the methods then used into something that would be applicable in contemporary times.

1.2 Sovereignty & legitimacy

The most fundamental principle of Islam is tawhid, which means unity or oneness of God. This principle is the spirit behind all ideas and practices in Islam. Translated into political philosophy, it asserts that sovereignty belongs only to Allah. This means that the explicit commands of Allah, as laid down in the Qur'an cannot be changed and must be adhered to by all. The principle of oneness further asserts that the sovereignty of God is fulfilled by the vicegerency of a single person in each age, called the Imam. It is a principle of faith that such an Imam, a divinely appointed direct descendant of the Prophet, will always exist on the face of the earth. This is the source of the political legitimacy for the leadership of the head of state, who is charged to exercise divine authority within the limits prescribed by Allah.

Another principle that applies here is that of the khilafah, that is the representation of the lordship of Allah as His trustee. Humankind is the recipient of a lordship over other creatures of Allah and ultimately bears the responsibility towards Allah of how this duty is executed. This responsibility is epitomised in a complete and perfect way in the person of the Imam, who for that reason is also called the khalif. The later term, popularly written caliph, commonly denotes the Imam in his capacity as the successor of the Prophet and the head of the Islamic State.

1.3 Head of state

There can be no doubt that the type of government espoused by Islam is a form of theocracy in which the head of state has ultimate decision-making powers. It is not a theocracy of the kind that once existed in Europe, as the suzerainty of God is not translated to an arbitrary rule of a priestly class but is invested in a single head whose rule operates within the divine injunctions of revelation, that is the Qur'an and the practice of the Prophet. He is the final interpreter and guardian of religion and its very embodiment, one to be emulated and one who provides the moral basis for law. His predecessor through an act of designation can only make his appointment.

The very basis for government in Islam is God-given morality and the ruler has to be the embodiment of that notion. Such high standards are demanded of the ruler that only such men as Prophets or Plato's Philosopher King in the Republic would do the post justice. In the Shi'a Fatimi Isma'ili faith, the ruler, that is the Imam, is at once the sinless and in-errant religious head of the ummah (Islamic community) and also the khalif, its political ruler.

The Imam represents the Prophet and commands the same authority in so far as obedience to him is concerned. The Qur'anic verses

"So accept what the Apostle assigns to you and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear Allah; for Allah is strict in Punishment."(59:7)

"But no by your Lord they can have no (real) Faith until they make you judge in all disputes between them and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions but accept them with the fullest conviction." (4:65)

apply equally for the Imam. The Imam therefore provides the dynamics within religion and law. He interprets religion in accordance with the requirements of the time. The authority inherent in the Imam deals with the question of antiquity and irrelevancy of historical perspectives or of developing classical Islamic institutions for a new age. The Imam in an Islamic state would have the authority to adopt laws, even divine laws and to enact constitutions and choose the administrative system to govern with according to the prevailing circumstances and needs of the times.

The subject of administrative systems allowable in Islam is vast and includes structure of government, taxation and wealth distribution, security etc. and will not be dealt with in this dissertation. This dissertation will limit itself to the judiciary, the philosophy of law and its ethics, the role of morality, human rights and democracy in an Islamic state, as these are also the principles upon which a contemporary secular state is based.

1.4 Essentials of a modern secular state

Almost all models of government all over the world follow the models that exist or once existed in Europe, whether they are dictatorships, monarchies or democracies. Western Europe defined nation-states and developed ideas that have shaped world governments, international politics and virtually all machinery required to run a contemporary state. There are a number of themes that such states aspire to. These can be classified as follows:

  1. Government should be based upon an elected parliament.
  2. The judiciary should be independent of other centres of power.
  3. A degree of egalitarian participation of the people in the running of the state, that is, a form of democracy.
  4. The protection of individual human rights and civil liberties.

This dissertation will investigate the role of each of these themes in an ideal Islamic State.

One should note that these themes are not always fully applied even in the most ardent of liberal democracies. Often, even a democratically elected government acts against the wishes of the people for selfish or paternalistic reasons. In other cases, as in the case of the trade union acts in UK, the judiciary gives extreme interpretation to law and over-rules the intent of parliament. Prejudices sometimes allow different interpretations of the same law to be applied for different sets of people. Democracy often produces undesired governments and protection of one set of rights often lead to violation of others.

2. The Shari'ah

Islam is most known through its application of the Shari'ah, which is commonly interpreted as Islamic law and popularly associated with criminal law. This is an inadequate definition as the Shari'ah is much more than that. There is undoubtedly a pre-eminence of law in Islam, which stems from its view of revelation. This it regards as the manifested Will of Allah. The proper response of humankind is therefore to submit to this Will, accept the trusteeship inherent in this submission and be judged by it. Thus, every act, however humble or private, whether sacred or not, becomes charged with "legal" consequences. This judgement is based on a moral measure by which there is, in Islam, the approved (halal) and the forbidden (haraam) for almost all aspects of life.

The Shari'ah is however much more than law. It defines the way in which the submission to Allah is to be done in every conceivable human situation. It provides a means of understanding the Divine Will and a means of enacting that Will through an action-based system, both for the individual as well as the society. It encompasses, for example, the whole body of ethics and morality, rules of prayer and fasting and all other aspects of religion to the extent that it is sometimes confused with religion itself. The word literally means "way" and denotes an actualisation of Divine Will. Some scholars correctly regard it as the most powerful theme in the genius of Islamic monotheism precisely because it is a process by which the concept of tawhid in Islam is given form.

There can therefore be no doubt that an idealised Islamic state would derive its features almost entirely through the Shari'ah. In a short dissertation, the discussion of Shari'ah has been limited to only to ethics and criminal law as it would take too long to investigate all its aspects.

 

2.1 Shari'ah Ethics

There is an over-riding importance of ethics4 in Islamic law. So much so that the core of Shari'ah is often described as nothing but ethics. The Qur'an repeatedly uses the phrase "those who believe and do righteous works" to denote those who are to achieve salvation, thereby showing that what is desired of man by God is not simply belief and worship but also righteous deeds.

The 10th century encyclopaedic work, Rasa'il Ikhwan al-Safa, makes ethics virtually the paramount purpose of existence of humankind5. There is no road to paradise except this world and to pursue this world for itself is the height of ethical evil, but to seek to realise value in this world is the height of ethical goodness. One of the remarkable features of the single-minded striving of ethics is the definition of what constitutes moral value. This is defined as the whole body of values, whatever they may be. A definition of evil is to promote one set of values at the expense of another. The realisation of the purpose of creation itself is the struggle to raise oneself to embrace all value. The importance of this philosophy cannot be underestimated. It means that moral values have an objective existence, which the Muslim is required to seek out and adhere to without regard to its source. This is pluralism right at the core of the Shari'ah, despite the supercedary status of morality themes revealed in the Qur'an. Such is the importance of ethics in Islam that it would form a natural cornerstone of the ideal Islamic state. It is conceivable that institutions of ethics and morality would form part of an ideal contemporary Islamic state and the force of morality would be relied upon much more than law for the running of society.

An important fact about Islamic ethics is that the theological and philosophical theories that were constructed to support ethics during the classical phase of Islam were based on Greek rationalism rather than any other eastern philosophy. This relationship of Islam to western intellectual history has not been recognised in the West and modern studies of ethics have largely ignored this period of its development. This also means that ethics of state espousing Islamic values would be amenable to analysis using contemporary tools developed by the West from Greek philosophy.

2.2 Shari'ah Law and crime

The Sharia'h law encompasses all laws pertaining to inter-personal and society relations, from marriage and inheritance to distribution of wealth and army etiquette. In effect, it has the potentiality of dealing with all that is the purview of the law in a contemporary state and more. Here, we shall deal with some aspects of Shari'ah law that can be regarded as criminal law.

Criminal law in any society has just one ultimate purpose, which is to protect the society from activity that society deems unacceptable for whatever reason, principally the causing of injury to others. The process of meting out justice to the crime may have a variety of reasons. The most liberal attitude would take the view that human nature is itself not criminal and that crime is only a symptom of an inequitable or unjust society. The criminal should therefore be punished only for rehabilitation purposes as the real cause of crime is the society itself. The view at the other extreme would be that crime is the responsibility of the perpetrator alone and the first function of criminal law is to protect the innocent society from the criminal. This group would favour capital punishment and jail sentences to prevent the criminal from repeating the crime. Latent in both procedures is the requirement that the aggrieved party should feel that justice has been done. Another element, especially found in religious societies is that each crime itself should attract an equivalent punishment in the objective sense, in which justice is seen to have been done in the eyes of God alone, regardless to its consequences to society.

The degree to which crime and punishment are to be viewed as being objective shapes the type of criminal law implemented in a particular state. Where the liberal and objective viewpoint outweighs the preventative, the state has necessarily to expend heavy resources in proving the crime and meting out justice accurately as its ultimate purpose is to identify the crime and deal with it accordingly. In a system where the primary purpose is prevention of crime, the emphasis is on the punishment that will have the highest deterring effect. The latter system is concerned more with the pragmatism than of attaching a value to the crime and accepts that the punishment may not always be commensurate with the crime. Although the former appears more humane and the latter more regimental, in practice it is almost impossible to practice the former which can lead to complicated and inefficient systems that still allow mis-carriages of justice.

One would think that a religious law would be inclined to define crime and punishment intrinsically; however Islam appears to do the opposite. What the Shari'ah does is leave the choice of criminal activity, indeed any sinful or merit worthy activity, to the individual by including ethics and morality within itself. The ideas of sin and retribution put justice and the objectivity of crime and punishment firmly in the spiritual domain, where Allah alone will apportion infallible justice. Punishing a crime on earth is therefore a social activity rather than a spiritual one and thus Islam attaches more importance to a practical and deterrent purpose to punishment than to its rehabilitating value. This is done by a rigid code of punishment attached to each crime, which is then deliberately rarely applied because of the following reasons:

  1. The crime is made difficult to prove. For example, in the act of fornication, which is punishable by public flogging or even death for the married fornicator, there needs to have four witnesses to the act of sexual intimacy for it to be proven6. Showing only that a couple live together or that they were found alone in a room from which sexual sounds were heard or that three people saw the act being done would render the crime unprovable and unpunishable. The effect of the system would therefore be to castigate only prostitution and blatant sexual promiscuity as that would be the only type of sexual crime that would be provable.
  2. There is an in-built reluctance for a Muslim to judge even by a God-given law. When a judgement is to be made, man does so reluctantly mindful of his own fallibility. This reluctance is best demonstrated by the Prophet when someone unaccused, came to him to admit to the crime of fornication. He refused to acknowledge it until the person repeated his admission freely four separate times7.

The Islamic criminal system therefore relies heavily on ethics and moral teachings, makes crime a private matter between the individual and his Maker, prefers not to punish even those who would otherwise be found guilty and considers punishment necessary for its deterring rather than rehabilitating value8. Thus even when the crime is proven, the judge is instructed to look for mitigating circumstances or throw doubt upon the evidence that would allow the commuting of the sentence. Moreover, the sentence can be avoided if the injured party forgives the crime prior to taking the matter to court or through some restitution. Besides that, the Imam has the absolute authority to grant pardon. All these are overtures of mercy that are built-in within the Islamic Shari'ah. The sporadic application of severe laws in modern times by some regimes aspiring to implement Shari'ah law is not normative, goes against the very ethos of Islam and is a by-product of the local political and social upheavals.

Miscarriages of justice are accepted in Islam as a manifestation of human weakness. However, the believer does not see such miscarriages as miscarriages in the grand scheme of things. An apparent miscarriage is considered to be the result of a different previous crime that may have been committed by the perpetrator in secret, thereby validating the impeccable justice of Allah and assigning an objective value, albeit in the spiritual sense, to the crime9. Punishment, when applied is to be viewed by the criminal as not only rehabilitative but also redemptive as crime punished on earth shall not be punished in the hereafter. In this sense, mercy is in-built even in the application of punishment.

In summary, the themes pertaining to crime in Islam have the practical effect of limiting society's right to judge and attach stigma to crime and severity of punishment carried out in public provides a powerful deterrent to crime. In a secular state, the purpose and practical effect of the criminal law system is often unclear.

In a contemporary Islamic state, the courts could possibly operate with a system close to the Western magistrate court model, allowing each side professional support, with the exception that crime would be provable only upon the availability of the prescribed witnesses and secondly, the decision as to whether a crime was committed or not would not be delegated to a lay and dubious jury. The judiciary and police and all other institutions connected to the criminal law system would probably be highly streamlined, not only because crime instances would be fewer but also because the stringent witness requirement would reduce the number of cases that can reasonably be brought to court.

3. Morality and Law

Like law, morality plays an important part in the shaping and regulation of societies. There is also a certain amount of overlap between law and morality as often law gives expression to the accepted standards of morality within the society, even if it does not directly legislate for it. This and the central importance of morality in Islam make a discussion on the relationship between law and morality pertinent to this dissertation.

3.1 Morality in a secular state

The secular state is suited best to the agnostic and it is therefore natural that most secular states in the west are predominantly agnostic. However, the source of morality even in the most agnostic western state is primarily Christianity, which still provides the principal moral imperative to the secular society. Secular moralists consider this religio-historical source as irrelevant to the present day and busily apply themselves to producing other sources of morality such as Objectivism and Utilitarianism. However, these new moral philosophies have yet to influence the common man, who continues to be guided by some form of religious morality.

The function of law in a secular state, in as far as morality is concerned, is guided by the need not to interfere with the private lives of the individual. However, law has always had to make some moral judgement pertaining to private lives and it cannot remain completely morally neutral10. Despite morality's relegation to the private sphere, the need for morality to maintain the integrity of society is recognised.

3.2 Morality in Islam

Morality in Islam obviously has an objective value and permeates every aspect of life. It is not based on habit or ritual but has a divine source that has a connection with the soul as the ultimate purpose. There is a call of the Prophet which indicates not only that it is part of religion but that it has a position "before" it11, which in turn means it is impossible to be religious unless moral etiquette is inculcated first.

The intensity with which moral values are imbibed is amply demonstrated by the following verse of the Qur'an (49:12) which even prohibits ill-thought of others:

"O ye who believe! Avoid suspicion as much (as possible): for suspicion in some cases is a sin: and spy not on each other nor speak ill of each other behind their backs. Would any of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Nay ye would abhor it...but fear Allah: for Allah is Oft-Returning Most Merciful".

In Islam, law and morality are both part of the body of Shari'ah, with morality having an important place in maintaining the integrity of society. There is no inhibition for legislating for morality to the extent that even what could be termed private morality is subject to law and is enforcable. This is because the danger of immorality in the eroding of the fabric of society and the need for adhering to a shared morality is well recognised. Law is designed not to pass moral judgements (as shown above in with criminal law) but to enforce morality.

3.3 Enforcement of morality

In the western state model, law is there essentially to protect what is regarded by the state to represent citizen's rights. It provides a safeguard against exploitation and corruption, protects the weak from the strong and maintains public order and decency12. It is not for the law to legislate or interfere with personal morality as morality is relegated to the private life of the individual. Even public morality must not be enforced by law, though this is not always practical and the law, almost begrudgingly, has to adopt a moral stance in some moral situations.

In so doing, the secular state has virtually no choice. If it considers religion as a personal matter and accepts the plurality of moral values, to legislate to satisfy the standards of one group could be detrimental to the other and to legislate to a perceived common morality acceptable to all (based on natural or human values) would be an administrative nightmare, if possible at all. The complexity of this problem is demonstrated by the well known Devlin-Hart13 debate in which even Lord Devlin, who supported the legislation of moral crimes (even when they may not necessarily be immediately injurious to society), came to grossly unacceptable conclusions such as, the final arbiter as to what constitutes a moral value would, in the end, be left up to the thinking of the legislature.

In this way, morality, one of the most powerful forces that has shaped civilised society, is almost unused by the modern secular state. I say almost because the state does attempt to shape personal morality by the agencies of education and personal religion and hopes to influence the inculcation of decent behaviour by means outside the law. Even then, some law does exist that can only be said to enforce morality, such as the laws pertaining to marriage and sexual behaviour.

This loose relationship between law and morality is now beginning to be perceived as disadvantageous to the secular society whose moral standards have continuously dropped along with the entrenchment of secularism. Thus there is some lobbying to re-introduce some basic moral education in British schools.

In Islam, morality, ethics and law have a much closer relationship as shown above. The law and moral values have the same divine source. Morality is as fixed as the law itself and law enforces most moral values. Sin and crime have very little difference. The government itself operates by a moral authority. The essentials of moral values are largely deterministic and the pursuit of ethical value is the principle pursuit of man. One can see that the problems of contemporary relative morality and its relation to law and society are dealt with in a complete self-sustaining set of parameters in Islam.

3.3.1 Private and Public morality

We have seen that a secular state based on the Western model eschews legislation of any morality as it considers that an infringement of individual privacy. This is particularly true for private morality, which is a matter that does not affect society except in eroding its overall fabric. Whereas public morality is something the state has to legislate against. The difficulties in defining the boundaries between the two types of morality, the general reluctance to legislate morality and the Christian history of the West combine to generate anomalies that further mock the value of morality. For example, incest, sodomy, bestiality, bigamy, suicide etc. are all illegal although these are typical results of a degraded private morality, yet homosexuality is legal simply because of successful lobbying by the homosexual pressure groups. The freedom of choice argument put forward for homosexuality for an essentially private consenting practice applies equally to incest and bigamy but such anomalies continue to exist, implying that one is morally acceptable whereas the other is not.

In Islam, virtually all morality is legislated for. There is a narrower classification of what constitutes private morality as morality is seen as not only an essential ingredient in the creation of a virtuous society but the pursuit of an ethical life fulfils the purpose of creation itself. Morality, as Lord Devlin argues14, "forms a seamless web, so that deviating from any part is likely to cause deviation from the whole". Thus the state legislates against all acts of immorality, even at the cost of reducing personal freedom. The few acts which could be regarded as private, such as abuse and swearing obscenity are also not completely free of the law as they too are subject to a kind of civil law called taadib, which imposes lighter sentences on such acts of immorality.

3.3.2 Examples of legislation of morals in Islam

The list of deeds which are immoral in Islam (and not in a secular state) and which would therefore be legislated against include:

                                 Drinking, including the production of and business based on intoxicants.

                                 Gambling, including state controlled lotteries.

                                 Fornication which is any sexual act outside the marriage, whether homosexual or not, incest, sodomy and any business based on such activity, such as prostitution.

One can see that the widespread use of any of these vices, when adopted by a sizeable section of the population would seriously degrade the society as a whole. An Islamic state would sacrifice personal freedom on these matters and favour a paternalistic approach.

3.4 Morality and Education

The secular state has the problem that morality, one of the most essential ingredients of a civilised society, is left largely undetermined. Schools do not teach morality due to fear of disadvantaging some groups. The law fears legislating morality for similar reasons and will only legislate if absolutely necessary. The realm of personal morality is left entirely up to the individual in order to protect his personal freedom. In this environment, it is increasingly difficult to define human value, what determines right and wrong and ultimately, how to live in society as caring individuals. This in turn erodes the fabric of society, which the law in part is meant to preserve and strengthen.

In the UK, a MORI poll conducted in 1996 shows that 41% of 15 to 35 year olds thought that there was no absolute right or wrong and that right and wrong depended upon the circumstances of the situation15. Schools are reluctant to talk about values, as most values are culture dependent. Moral building influence is mainly from outside the school system. In particular, role models within the entertainment industry, and the culture associated with that industry have a bigger influence on their morality than any other single factor. One can see the obvious problem with this situation where morals are derived from areas hardly known for any moral standards. This is of course recognised and the re-introduction of the teaching of morality within the education system is being lobbied for. The proponents of morality teaching believe that it should be possible to identify common moral traits/trends and teach those in school. They are pushing for a National Forum. Holland, for example, teaches core moral values in schools16.

In Islam, there is a great emphasis on education17. If there was one single factor that could be regarded as the cause of the unprecedented flourishing of the classical Islamic civilisation, it was the insatiable thirst for knowledge inculcated in the believer. Thus, it is not difficult to see that the first role models of pupils in such an environment would be the teachers. Further, the study of ethics and the teaching of morality would be very much part of the education system. Besides core morality, which would have resonance in most cultures, Islam does recognise value per se as moral. Anything that is regarded as adding value to society would be taught, going some way towards solving the problem of plurality of morals.

4. Human Rights

4.1 Human Rights as a western value

Human Rights have become the principle moral theme of the modern contemporary state. The UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights is regarded as one of its most important documents, providing guidance to all other UN activities. Legal systems of the world often base their ultimate judgement on perceived violations of human rights. It has become a spearhead of modern contemporary politics.

The call for human rights is an essential feature of a western society precisely because there is no other tangible ideal for the western state to uphold. Like most modern values, human rights are a product of a Christian historical experience of the West. Once Christianity had been displaced from the role of defining what was good for society, society had to fall back on their own devices to define its values and develop legal systems to protect such values.

Modern human rights, as enshrined in the UN charter and in many western constitutions are therefore an expression of western values, borne out of western history. Human is defined as a sovereign individual and his rights are limited to civil and political liberties. The individual has rights merely by virtue of being a human being and the protection of these individual rights take precedence over any other form of rights such as communal rights or the degradation of morality. In traditional moral systems, the concepts of duties far outweighed that of rights and the rights of the individual were only viewed as part of the overall rights of societies. The concept of modern human rights is thus a new idea, born out of a shifts in paradigms in Europe, but are nevertheless espoused by states all over the world as being indigenous to their own pasts.

4.1.1 Human Rights Charter

Human rights as defined above are, however, just as elusive as they are noble and despite its global appeal, human rights are subject to many anomalies. Often, the privileged of society appear to have more rights and the legal system can be manipulated by the sheer force of the mind-power that money can buy. The rights themselves have to be continuously re-defined depending on the whims of the age and the value-system that has predominance. This fluidity and also its global appeal has caused a need for defining and refining these rights and enshrining them in documents such as the UN's Declaration of Human Rights.

This declaration, adopted within constitutions in most countries, guarantees many rights, including the freedom of religion. However, in most Western states, such as UK, this right is only fully accorded to freedom to hold religious opinions. As far as religious practice is concerned, the rights only exist in so far as they are perceived not conflict with other aims such as public interest. In some cases, the extent of that right too is accorded to Christianity more than to other religions despite the secular nature of the law in general. In some states, such as India, there has been a tradition of providing "personal laws" that allow certain family laws, such as those pertaining to marriage, divorce, inheritance etc. to be derived from the individual's religion. Thus, the Hindu and Muslim in India would, in such cases, apply a different set of laws for the same circumstance. However, the rights enshrined in the constitution often clash with religious practice and the state has then to agonise over which freedom or right it should uphold. Thus, the Hindu rite of sati, where the widow is (voluntarily) cremated with the deceased husband is illegal, despite its importance in the Hindu religion, for the paternalistic protection of the wife. Similarly, there are writ petitions in the supreme court of India that seek to withdraw the basic rights of Muslims to apply personal law, especially pertaining to perceived gender inequality.

Other areas of human rights definition and application pose similar difficulties of conflict and anomaly. For example, censorship for the rights of one set of people or values often conflict with the right to freedom of expression of others. Human rights are also all but abandoned when the state perceives a threat to itself because of those rights. For example, in war or emergency situations the rights of association and expression are usually curtailed in the interests of national security.

4.2 Rights and Obligations in Islam

In Islam, the focus of rights is not the individual man but the man in his relation to Allah. Human duties take precedence over human rights. Human rights themselves are only what Allah chooses to bestow and are subservient to divine rights. The essential vitality in this thinking as is the shift of focus from "what rights do I have" to "what are my duties". In the modern secular society, the belief that every right has a concurrent duty is only an ideal practiced by the few whereas in Islam, the society has divine rights as its essential moral force. Mankind is bound by duty rather than endowed with rights. Equality of man, for example, is a divine injunction; to be respected that much more. The call of the Prophet:

"There can be no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab in the sight of Allah; closeness to Him is measured only by piety"

effectively wiped out all forms of tribal, racial and national prejudices. It is thus a question of certainty of divine injunctions against the uncertainty derived from human ingenuity.

The vocabulary of the twentieth century western world that defines and gives expression to modern concepts itself has evolved along with these concepts in a way which makes it difficult to express in that language anything other than the secular values and concepts that the vocabulary evolved for. It is therefore difficult to define and categorise rights pertaining to Allah and man in the language of contemporary human rights.

Having said that, rights such as the right to free speech and opinion, the right not to be slandered or assaulted, the right not to be imprisoned without reason, etc. that are commonly found in contemporary human rights bills are amply provided for in Islam. Indeed, some scholars claim that the concepts of free will, which inspired the quest for freedom in the West and led to many of its cherished values, have themselves been derived from Islam18.

It is the extent and scope of prohibitions that form an obvious practical difference between the two systems. In western society, man is "free" to do as he likes provided he does not transgress equivalent "rights" of others; though this right is not as absolute as it seems. In Islam, man is free to do what he likes within the parameters provided by divine injunctions, whether those parameters define the rights of others or not. Thus, the right to freedom of expression, for example, is qualified by the parameter of not slandering Allah or His prophets or anyone else. Whilst the last of these has remedy under civil law, the former is made illegal by criminal law. The case of Salman Rushdie brought home the clash of these differing paradigms where the West upheld the right of free expression (and gave it accolade) at the expense of religious slander and the Muslims saw the freedom of expression having transgressed all bounds of decency and upheld the value of responsibility.

4.2.1 The rights of Women

To the western liberal, nothing epitomises the lack of rights in Islam as much as the position of women. The main thrust of the accusation centres on 4 themes, vis. the dress code, polygamy, inheritance and witness status. Muslims are at pains to point out that the rights conferred to women by Islam far exceeded anything given to them by any other society at the time (7th century). That uncontrolled polygamy was reduced to a maximum of four wives, that the widespread practice of disposing female babies was terminated by the advent of Islam, that when Islam considered a woman to be man's equal partner in so far as the purpose of creation was concerned, other societies, including medieval Christian ones were debating whether women had souls! However, not withstanding the tremendous progress Islam fostered for women, the nature of equality advocated for women in contemporary times exceeds that provided for in Islam.

However, Islam does not regard women as inferior either in their soul's proximity to Allah or in their status on earth. Islam emphasises the differences between the sexes as being due to the roles each is to play in fostering a just, morale society. There are a number of principles upon which these differing roles are defined:

  1. The woman is regarded as more naturally capable as a homemaker. There is great importance attached to the nucleus family and the upbringing of children as an ingredient to the type of society Islam espouses and this role is regarded as central to it.
  2. There is a respect attributed to women that calls for their protection at all costs. Sexual molestation, for example, is seen as the lowest of crimes and one of the worst forms of immorality. This is the impetus for the all-covering dress code that Muslim women wear. Many Muslim women welcome this dress as a freedom from fashion, the coercive pressure of which can be unbearable, especially to the young.

It is in the context of these principles that the laws of inheritance and social intercourse have been formulated. Their exact effect in a contemporary society would require a deeper research. However, one may note that Islam does not prevent women from taking up work or careers, it only insists on that such work being dignified in keeping with the status of women. Nor does Islam prevent women from occupying positions of importance in government, as history of the classical Islam amply demonstrates. Polygamy was one of the most humane ways of dealing with the imbalance in numbers between the sexes. War often caused widows who found a home as second wives. The ruling on polygamy, often forgotten, is that it should only be entered into if there is the possibility of equal treatment for the wives19 and even then marriage to widows is encouraged over single women. The romanticised kings' harem with hundreds of concubines and wives and the use of polygamy to pamper to male lusts has no foundation in Islamic law and would be outlawed in an ideal Islamic state, as would be the unfounded prevention of women from driving that exists in Saudi Arabia.

5. Democracy

5.1 Western Democracy

The concept of democracy is difficult to fully describe partly because almost any desirable value pertaining to the relationship between the individual and the state is regarded as part of democracy. Strictly speaking, democracy is a form of government in which sovereign power lies in the people as a whole and is exercised by their elected representatives. Although there can be more than one model in which this participation is possible, it is the western one, borne out of western history and as a cure of western ills, that contemporary democracy is known by.

One should remember that the purpose of democracy is to engender a society and government that allows people the freedom to live a peaceful and purposeful life, allowing them to direct that life in their own particular way without undue hindrance. In the West, however, there are two aspects of democracy that arise from the history of the West:

  1. Democracy, like government, is viewed as an end in itself. Something desirable that is somehow meant to enhance the life of the individual, over which the West lays great importance. This is partly because democracy is seen to include certain freedoms that the West cherishes and partly because of a lack of other sufficiently suitable models that provide the same freedoms. Not all societies accept this view of the ethos of democracy.
  2. The West views the modes and implementation of democracy in only its own terms, refusing to acknowledge any deviation. Despite this, even Western democracy is a contested term. The Marxist Soviet Union, until recently, claimed to be democratic within the Western framework as do a number of other states who are at variance with systems predominant in UK and US. The West promotes the ideas of multi-parties and opposition, free elections, majority rule, existence of human rights watchdog groups, women's and labour associations and a free press as typical ingredients of democratic society. It seeks to promote these "fundamentals" even in environments where such modes would not lead to the realisation of the aims of democracy.

The Western democratic model is of course not an infallible system of regulation. It can sometimes produce the very types of government it opposes, such as the Nazi one in Germany. On the other hand, democratic results are sometimes ignored when they don't suit the purpose, as when the military, with Western support refused to acknowledge the results of an election that put the FIS in power in Algeria in 1991. These double standards indicate that even the ideals of Western democracy are sometimes discarded in favour of other interests.

5.1.1 Elections

Virtually every prescription for establishing a democratic regime involves the holding of free elections. This is regarded as the single most important component of the democratic system. However, even here, we find democratic systems such as that of Athens that have successfully existed in history without elections. Even today, there is criticism of the electoral process, such as this20:

"In order to have democracy, we must abandon elections... and revert to the ancient principle of choosing by lot those who are to hold various offices... Elections inherently breed oligarchies."

Elections induce vulnerability to be re-elected in the elected representatives. Whilst this may seem like a positive trait, it can also work against the process of democracy. This happens when parliamentarians are driven primarily by the fear of doing something that may render them unelectable. This over-riding concern and other requirements such as the need to tow the party line cause the representation of the views of the electorate to lose importance in their work agenda, thereby limiting the democratic nature of their representation.

Despite the ability of the common man to elect his representative, he has no say over who amongst the elected representatives should govern and in what capacity. In some cases, such as in UK, he is also unable to elect the effective leader, that is the Prime Minister. Party politics, unequal power of the elected representatives, inability to change their representative for a period of term, inability of representative to deal with the concerns of their electorate etc. limit the democratic process and compromise the purity of the democratic ideal.

5.1.2 Majority Rule

Another ingredient that the West regards as essential is majority rule in a multi-party system. Multi-parties are regarded as essential to make reasonable choice and opposition available to the electorate and majority rule for effective government. However, neither is necessary for democracy. Many states, even in Western Europe, base their government on a consensus system and a number of African states have argued for and implemented democratic states on a single party system that is more indigenous21. Even in the US, there were serious suggestions by the 1992 presidential candidate Ross Perot to change the decision making process, including use of national electronic referenda.

Whilst a parliament theoretically allows the participation of the common man in the running of the state, in practice, this is hardly done. The affairs of the state are decided upon almost entirely by a governmental elite. An opposition in parliament subjects the ruling party to scrutiny and thereby provides a check on excessive authority but in practice, it has very little power and is privy to much less information. The head of state and centres of power are usually inaccessible to the common man.

5.2 Democracy in Islam

Every ideology and every modern state aspires to have democracy, and each finds some indigenous expression of some aspect of modern democracy in their histories. This itself shows that the idea of public participation has been around in all societies in one way or another sometime in the past.

A similar exercise by some modern scholars has found themes of modern democracy in Islam. There is no doubt that Islam promotes egalitarianism, social welfare and human rights, but the reality is that the method of rulership and its selection in Islam cannot be termed democratic. In Islam, sovereignty belongs to Allah alone and a divinely appointed Imam runs His kingdom on earth. There is no requirement for popular sovereignty in Islam. The method of appointment to the positions of authority depend entirely on the Imam who can choose any system, even a full-fledged western style democracy to operate under him.

The primary difference, besides the all-encompassing power of the Imam would be the attitudes which allow the fulfilment of the purpose of government. The attitude of confrontation prevalent in party-politics in a secular Western democracy, for example, would be the anti-thesis of the unity espoused by Islam and would have no place in an Islamic government. Those in authority would be accountable to the people at one level but to the Imam at another. They would be participants in a system in which sovereignty lies in a power beyond their reach, all of which should provide a corrective moral imperative.

5.2.1 Consultation

Consultation is obligatory at all levels of the Islamic government. The Qur'an requires even the Imam to engage in consultation as the following verse addressed to the Prophet states:

"Pardon them and ask forgiveness for them and consult with them upon the conduct of affairs, and having made your decision, place your trust in Allah" (Qur'an, 3:159)

This emphasis to consult even for one whose authority is absolute indicates the importance of the consultative process. The same obligation exists in lower tiers of government by extension, except that in this case, the head of state may choose to appoint an assembly for a particular ministry or function and insist on decisions being taken by majority decision. The Prophet repeatedly commanded Muslims to engage into consultation.

There is no doubt therefore that an Islamic democracy, if chosen by the Imam, would be consultative rather than majoritarian in nature.

5.3 Form of governance in Islam

The Qur'an and the practice of the Prophet provide broad outlines as to how a state should be governed, leaving it up the Imam to evolve institutions that would be appropriate for the times. However, some broad outlines are available that serve to indicate the type or government an ideal Islamic state would have. These have been obtained primarily from a celebrated letter from the successor of the Prophet, Ali ibn Abi Talib22, to his governor of Egypt, Malik al-Ashtar. The document23 was written less than three decades after the era of the Prophet and is widely considered to be based upon the teachings of the Qur'an and the practice of the Prophet himself.

This document asserts that the position of authority derives its legitimacy only from Allah through the Imam in a hierarchical system. The governor is told he is free to choose whatever system of administration under him but is advised as follows:

                                 He must be mindful of his duty to Allah but also know that the concern and exertion for the welfare of his people is also the execution of this duty.

                                 He must at all times endeavour to win the sympathy and confidence of the common man. A great emphasis is placed on those of authority to win the confidence of the people, which again implies the requirement of impeccable moral standards.

                                 He must treat Muslim and non-Muslims with equality for both categories of people are subject to the same weaknesses, needs and wants. This lays down the basis for the egalitarian principle. It was not uncommon to see, for example, Jews and Christians in ministerial posts in the Fatimid administration. In sharp contrast to the conditions in the West, the people of the Book enjoyed full rights as citizens in the classical Islamic states.

                                 The poor, disabled, orphans and others who need the help of the state must be aided from state revenue. This is the basis for a welfare system24.

                                 The need for the independence of the judiciary is advised25 and the governor is asked to ensure that the judiciary is well paid, well looked after and given prestige to prevent corruption. This again shows the extent to which Islam recognises the inherent weaknesses of man and tries to create an environment to reduce the effects of such weaknesses.

                                 Justice and equity are to be upheld under all circumstances.

6. Conclusions

A modern secular state has certain worthy essentials that protect the rights of the citizen and institutions of the nation-state system and enable its governance through the interaction of such essentials. We have seen that most of these essentials have been shaped by Western thought and are outcomes of European history. That they have limitations and anomalies which the Western states can live with. However, they may not as readily be applicable to a state that does not share the West's historical experience notwithstanding the fact that such states themselves aspire to these themes.

The ideals of an Islamic state have been briefly considered. It has been shown that in an Islamic state, sovereignty belongs to Allah alone and that Divine Will is executed through the presence of the Imam, who has all the powers of head of state and is simultaneously the final authority in religion.

The Shari'ah law, popularly known in the West as medieval and excessively punitive, is shown to be a dynamic ethical force in its capacity as the realisation of the Divine Will. Despite its divine origins, the criminal and civil law of the Shari'ah is very much a practical, prescriptive one whose primary social purpose is the promotion of social justice and maintain the integrity of society. It acknowledges the fallibility of human nature and compensates for it. Its spirit is one of determent rather than the idealised meting out of justice in proportion to the crime. This is so despite the central importance of justice in Islam.

It has been shown that the purpose of government in Islam is the facilitation of worship, which in Islam encompasses all deeds that are defined as good, and thus to effect man's salvation; and to produce a morally upright, God-fearing society. Such a society would, it is claimed, also engender a just government in a symbiotic relationship. Neither government, nor its themes are viewed as ends in themselves.

Although the Islamic State is opposed to popular sovereignty, it has within it many of the themes of modern democracy. However, there is a far greater emphasis on human duties than human rights, public and communal welfare over individualism and the morality is far more strongly integrated into law than in a modern secular state. The basis of just government in Islam is founded upon its ethics.

The dissertation has attempted to show that Islam does have themes for a practical contemporary Islamic state that could even have advantages over a western secular one.

7. Bibliography

1. Ali, Ibn Abi Talib, Nahjul Balagha, 7th century sermons of Ali ibn Abi Talib compiled in the 10th century by Syed Ali Razi, translated into English by Syed Mohammed Askari Jafery, Khorasan, Islamic Centre Karachi, 1977.

2. Rasa'il Ikhwan al-Safa, 4th century 52-volume encyclopaedic work in Arabic, Darul Sadr, Beirut, 1957

3. al-Ansari, Jalal, Ed., Introduction to the Systems of Islam, Al-Khilafah Publications London, 1996.

4. Hourani, George F., Reason and Tradition in Islamic Ethics, Cambridge University press, 1985

5. Esposito, John L. & Voll, John, Islam and Democracy, Oxford University Press, 1996.

6. Esposito, John L. Ed., The Oxford Encyclopaedia of the Modern Islamic World, Oxford University Press, New York, 1995.

7. Mitchell, Basil, Law, Morality and Religion in a Secular Society, Oxford University Press, 1970.

8. More, Thomas, Utopia, edited by Logan G.M., & Adams, R.M., Cambridge, 1996.

9. al-Nu'man, Sayyidna Qadi, Da'a'im al-Islam, 10th century work on jurisprudence, edited by A.A.Fyzee, Dar ul Maarif, Cairo, 1961.

10. Rahman, A., Ed., Muhammad Encyclopaedia of Seerah, Seerah Foundation London, 1988.

11. Inquiry, monthly magazine, issues of 1986 to 1988, published by Tropvale Ltd, London.


Footnotes

1 The classical period of Islam, between the 7th and 13th Christian centuries saw Islamic law and theories of philosophy and religion form. What was then developed has been relied upon throughout the rest of history as the sound basis of religion. Islamic societies led the world in its patronage of arts and its study of sciences. It was the Islamic civilisation at its zenith.

2 "Rasa'il Ikhwan al-Safa" states that religion is not merely the acts of prayer and fasting but the striving of for betterment in this world as well as in the hereafter.

3 The ummah, a word difficult to render in English, applies to the community of believers, the whole body of Muslims.

4 By ethics, we mean mainly normative ethics that attempt to define the nature of human character and give a philosophical existence and form to ethics itself. It is in effect the philosophical study of the source of morality.

5 Rasa'il Ikhwan al-Safa, vol. 10, pp 54-5

6 Da'a'im al-Islam vol. II, page 449

7 Da'a'im al-Islam vol. II, page 450

8 There is a case of a man accused of illicit sexual advances against his slave, who on having been found guilty, repented to the extent of freely choosing for himself the worst of 3 punishments available to him. His repentance was so heart-rending that the Imam elected to forgive him, saying that the Imam had authority to forgive. From Al-Majalis al-Hatimiya.

9 Sayyidna Qadi al-Nu'man, in his "Kitab al-Himma", a 10th century work, edited by Mustafa Ghalib and published by Darul Maktab al-Hilal, Beirut, 1979 gives an account on page 97 of a person having committed an act of indecency on a woman at the sacred Ka'aba is later accused and punished for stealing of which he is innocent. The man realises that the punishment he received is for the previous crime.

10 Mitchell B., "Law, Morality, and Religion in a Secular State", page 134

11 "Moral etiquette is prior to religion and the Command (of God) has priority above etiquette"

12 Wolfenden Report: paragraphs 13-15

13 Mitchell, B., "Law, Morality, and Religion in a Secular Society".

14 Ibid, page 15

15 Charter D. & Sherman J., "School chief sets modern ten commandments...", Times, 15.1.96

16 As above.

17 Sayyidna Qadi al-Nu'man, in his celebrated work, Da'a'im al-Islam, says on page 83 that the Prophet has unequivocally stated that "Seeking of knowledge is obligatory upon every Muslim man and Muslim woman" and also "Seek knowledge even if you have to travel to China for it."

18 Ameer Ali, in the "Spirit of Islam" says on page 271 "Not until the recluse of Hira (Prophet Mohammed) sounded the note of freedom, not until he proclaimed the practical equality of mankind, not until he abolished every privilege of caste and emancipated labour did the chains that held in bondage sections of the earth fall to pieces."

19 "Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so): But turn not altogether away (from one), leaving her as in suspense. If ye do good and keep from evil, lo! Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.", the Qur'an 4:129.

20 Burnham, John, "Is democracy possible? The alternative to electoral politics", Berkeley, UCP, 1985, page 9.

21 For example, see "Ujamaa, an experiment in African Socialism", J.K. Nyerere, Tanzania Elimu Press, 1968.

22 Ali ibn Abi Talib, the prince of the faithful, is held in esteem only second to the Prophet by the Shi'a Fatimi Isma'ilis. He is revered as the seat of knowledge and wisdom by all Muslims whose words they consider, in value as well as in prose, as second only to the Word of Allah, spoken through the Prophet. His influence on the history of the Islam is enormous. All mystic orders of Islam trace their ancestry to him as do all Shi'a sects. Even modern-day Arab socialists trace the roots of Arab socialism to him.

23 Nahjul Balagha, the sermons of Ali ibn Abi Talib, page 246

24 The letter eloquently states "I want to caution you about the poor. Fear Allah about their condition and your attitude towards them. They have no support, no resources and no opportunities. They are poor, destitute and many are cripples unfit for work. Some beg openly whilst others do not beg out of self-respect though their conditions announce their distress, poverty, destitution and want. For the sake of Allah, Malik, protect them and their rights. He has laid this responsibility upon your shoulders. You must apportion a share for them from the government treasury and also benefit them from a share in kind from crops..."

25 The letter says "Let the judiciary be above every kind of executive pressure or influence, above fear of favour, intrigue or corruption"


 
by Taher Bhaisaheb Ezzuddin, son of Shahzada Alivaqar Qaidjoher Bhaisaheb Ezzuddin. Questions and comments may be sent to Shk Mustafa Abdulhussein.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE SYSTEM OF ISLAM  

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

Tuesday, 18 May 2004

The Way to Belief

Man revives according to what he carries in terms of thought about life, the universe and man, and about their relationship, as a whole, with what preceded life and what comes after it. Hence, in order for man to progress, it is necessary to radically and comprehensively change his current thought and generate another thought for him, because it is the thought that generates the concepts about things and concentrates them. Man shapes his behaviour in life according to his concepts about it. Hence, mans concepts about a person he likes shapes his behaviour towards that person in contrast with his behaviour towards a person he hates and towards whom he holds the concepts of hate, and also in contrast with his behaviour towards a person he does not know nor holds any concepts about. So, human behaviour is linked to mans concepts and when we wish to change the behaviour of the declined man and make it a refined behaviour, it is imperative to change his concepts first. Allah (swt) says:

 

"Allah does not change the circumstances of any people until they have changed what is within themselves." [TMQ 13:11]

The only way to change man‚s concepts is by establishing the thought about life on earth in order to set up the correct concepts about it. The thoughts about life on earth will not be established in a productive manner in one's mind unless the thought about the universe, man, life, and about the reality before and after life, and the current life‚s relationship with what is before and after it is set up. This can be achieved by giving a comprehensive thought about the universe, man and life, because this is the intellectual basis upon which all ideas about life are built. Giving this comprehensive thought about these matters is the solution to man‚s greatest problem. Once this problem is solved all other problems are solved, because all other problems are either partial compared to the main problem or ramifications of it. This solution wouldn't lead to the correct progress, unless it is a sound solution which is compatible with man‚s innate nature and which convinces the mind and thus fills the heart with tranquillity.

The true solution cannot be reached except through an illuminated thinking process about the universe, man and life. Consequently, those who yearn for progress and ways of intellectual ascension must first solve this problem in a correct manner by means of illuminated thought. This solution is none other than the őaqeedah which serves as the intellectual basis upon which every thought generated about behaviour in life and about its systems is built.

Islam turned to the greatest problem of man and solved it in a manner that agrees with his nature, convinces his mind, and fills his heart with tranquillity. Islam made the intellectual acceptance of this solution a condition for embracing it. Therefore, Islam is built upon one basis, i.e., the őaqeedah, which states there is a Creator behind the universe, man, and life on earth, there is a creator who created them all and created everything: He is Allah. And that this Creator created everything out of nothing. His existence is compulsory and He is not created - otherwise, He wouldn‚t be a Creator. His being a Creator makes it necessary that He is not created and that His existence is imperative because all things depend for their existence on Him and He does not depend on anything.

The things which are comprehensible to the mind, man, life, and the universe, are limited, weak, imperfect, it is imperative for them to have a Creator. Man is limited, because he grows in every aspect (intellectually and physically) to a certain limit that he cannot surpass. Life is limited, because it manifests itself only in individuals and ends with the individual. The universe is limited, because it is the sum of celestial bodies, and each body is limited, and the sum of limited things is irrefutably limited. Thus, man, life, and the universe are definitely limited. When we ponder on the limited things, we see that they are not azaly (eternal - having no beginning or end), otherwise they could not be limited, and therefore, they must be created by something else, which is the Creator of man, life and the universe? This Creator, is either created by someone else, created himself, or eternal and self-subsistent. It is absolutely false that he is created by someone else, because if so this entity would be limited and could not be rationally considered as the Creator. As for being self created, the ramification of which would be simultaneously being created by himself and creating himself. This is simply absurd. Hence, the creator whose existence is imperative must be eternal and self-subsistent. He is Allah.

 

Anyone who has the mental faculty can comprehend from things that can be sensed that they have a creator. Since they are perceived to be imperfect, weak and dependent, they are definitely created. Therefore, it is sufficient to draw one‚s attention to anything in the universe, life and man to conclude that there is a creator and an organiser. Hence, looking at any celestial body of the universe, contemplating upon any facet of life, or considering any aspect of man, gives definite evidence to the existence of Allah. Therefore, we see that the Qur‚an draws attention to these things and instructs man to ponder upon them, their surroundings, and what is related to them, and to conclude from his pondering the existence of Allah. If man studies and concludes how things are in need of other things, he will definitely comprehend that the Creator exists. There are hundreds of Qur‚anic ayat expressing this meaning. In surah Aal-Imran, Allah says:

"Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alteration of night and day, these are indeed signs for men of understanding." [TMQ 3:190]

and in surah ar-Rum,

"And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. Lo! herein indeed are signs for men of knowledge." [TMQ 30:22]

and in surah al-Ghashiya,

"Will they not look at the camels, how they are created! And the heaven, how it is raised! And the mountains, how they are set up! And the earth, how it is spread!" [TMQ 88:17-20]

and in surah al-Tariq,

"So let man reflect from what he is created. He is created from a gushing fluid, that is issued from between the loins and ribs." [TMQ 86:5-7]

and in surah al-Baqarah,

"Lo in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of night and day, and the ships which run upon the sea with that which is of use to men, and the water which Allah sends down from the sky, thereby reviving the earth after its death, and dispersing all kinds of beasts therein, and in the ordinance of the winds, and the clouds obedient between heaven and earth are signs (of Allah‚s sovereignty) for people who have sense." [TMQ 2:164]

In addition, there are so many ayat that call upon man to ponder deeply upon things and their surroundings and that which is related to them, so that his belief in Allah is firmly established through reason and clear evidence.

 

Indeed, belief in the Creator, is innate in every man, but such innate belief comes through his emotions, a path which neither leads to trustworthy results nor to accuracy if left alone. The emotions often add mythical and unfounded ideas to the original belief. These unwarranted elements of belief causes one to further stray from the correct belief and catapults one into Kufr and infidelity. Idolatry, superstitions, and mythology are the outcome of mistakes of the emotional faith. Therefore, Islam does not leave the emotions as the only way to belief, so as not to ascribe certain attributes contradictory to divinity, or to consider Allah incarnated in material substances, or to perceive the possibility of approaching him through worshipping material substances whether they are icons or idols, thus, leading to Kufr or shirk, or to fantasies and superstitions all of which are renounced by true faith. That is why Islam compels the use of a conscious mind with the emotions and obliges the Muslim to use his mind to believe in Allah and forbids imitation in őaqeedah. Therefore, Islam assigned the mind as the arbitrator in belief in Allah and forbids imitation in őaqeedah. Allah, says:

"Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alteration of night and day, these are indeed signs for men of understanding." [TMQ 3:190]

Every Muslim must have his conviction and belief based on reasoning, thinking, and pondering, and to assign his and her intellect the role of absolute arbitration in the conviction in Allah (swt). The call to look deeply in the universe to understand its law and to be guided to the belief in the Creator is repeated in the Qur‚an hundreds of times in many surahs, all of which are directed to man‚s faculty, inviting him to think deeply and to ponder so as to base his belief upon reason and clear evidence, and warning him not to imitate his forefathers without investigating, scrutinising, and being ensured in its correctness. This is the belief which Islam called for and not the so called faith of the elders and ancestors. It is the faith of the illuminated and absolutely assured person who searched and contemplated until he came through contemplation and thinking to the assured existence of Allah.

Despite the mandatory use of the mind to arrive at the correct belief in Allah (swt), man is unable to comprehend things beyond the boundaries of his senses and mental faculty because man‚s mind is limited regardless of how much it develops and grows. Hence, its ability to comprehend is limited, and consequently falls short of comprehending the essence of Allah (swt), because He is beyond the universe, man and life, and the human mind cannot comprehend what is beyond man. Thus, the human mind is unable to comprehend what Allah is. It shouldn‚t be said how does man believe in Allah with his mind while his mind cannot comprehend what Allah (swt) is? Because belief entails possessing a conviction in the existence of Allah, Who is comprehensible through the existence of His creation, i.e., universe, man and life. These are within the limits of what the mind can conceive and thus, man comprehends them, and from this he can comprehend the existence of a creator who is Allah (swt). Therefore, the belief in the existence of Allah is rational and within the limits of man‚s fixed mental capacity. Comprehending Allah‚s essence is impossible since He is beyond the universe, man and life, and hence He is beyond the capability of any mind. The mind is unable to comprehend what is beyond its bounds because of its inherent limitation to do so. This limitation itself should be one of the factors which strengthens the belief and not a source of suspicion and doubt. Moreover, since our belief in Allah is reached through our mind, our comprehension of His existence is complete. And since our sensing of His existence is linked with the mind this sensing is absolutely sure. Thus, this initiates in us a complete comprehension and assured feeling of all the divine attributes associated with the Creator. All of this convinces us that we will be unable to comprehend the essence of Allah, despite our firm belief in Him. Therefore, we have to submit to all that He has informed us about, which the mind is powerless to conceive or to arrive at its comprehension due to the natural inability of the human mind by its relative and limited standards to comprehend what is beyond it for this comprehension would need absolute and unlimited standards which man neither possesses nor can afford to possess.

As for the proof of the need for messengers, it has been proven that man is created by Allah (swt) and that religiousness is innate in man, since it is one of his instincts. Thus, man, by his nature, sanctifies his Creator, and this sanctification means worship, which constitutes the relationship between man and his Creator. Leaving this relationship without organisation will lead to turmoil and to worshipping other than the Creator. Therefore, it is necessary to organise this relationship with a correct system which cannot emanate from man himself, because he cannot comprehend what the Creator is in order to set up this relationship with Him. Hence, this system must come from the Creator. Since the Creator has to convey this system to man, there should be messengers to convey to the people the religion of Allah (swt).

Further evidence of the people‚s need for messengers is that the fulfilment of man‚s instincts and organic needs is a necessity. If this satisfaction were left without a system it would lead to an erroneous and abnormal fulfilment and thus result in man‚s misery. Therefore, it is necessary to have a system to organise man‚s instincts and organic needs and this system does not come from man, because his understanding of the organisation of man‚s instincts and organic needs is liable to disparity, differences, contradiction and being influenced by the environment in which he lives. If this organisation was left to man, the system would be liable to disparity, differences and contradiction which would lead to man‚s misery. Therefore, this system must come from Allah (swt).

As for proving that the Qur‚an is revealed by Allah, it is well known that the Qur‚an is an Arabic book conveyed by Muhammad (saw). Thus, it is either from the Arabs, from Muhammad, or from Allah, and it is not possible that it be from any other except these three since it is Arabic in language and style.

It is false to say that the Qur‚an comes from the Arabs because it challenged them to bring forth any similar to it.

"Say, bring ten surahs like unto it." [TMQ 11:13]

"Say, bring one surah like unto it." [TMQ 10:38]

And they tried to bring the like of what they were challenged with but they failed to do so. Hence, this book is not their speech because they were unable to bring the like, though it challenged them, and they tried to do so. It is also false to say that it is from Muhammad, since Muhammad is one of the Arabs, and whatever the height of his genius, he was still a human being and a part of his community and nation. Since the Arabs themselves had failed to bring the like, this also applies to Muhammad, the Arab, that he could not bring the like of it. Thus, it is not from him. Moreover, Muhammad (saw) has left hadith sahih and hadith mutawatir, whose authenticity is beyond refute that speaks to this issue. If any of these ahadeeth were to be compared with any verse of the Qur‚an, there would be no similarity between them in style, even though he (peace be upon him) used to utter the revealed verse and say the hadith at the same time. Whenever any man attempts to disguise his words, he will remain similar in style, because his words are a part of him. Since there is no similarity between the hadith and the verse in style, the Qur‚an is absolutely not Muhammad‚s words. Besides this, none of the Arabs, who were the most acquainted with the styles of the Arabic speech, alleged that the Qur‚an is Muhammad‚s words, or that it is similar to his words. The only thing that they claimed was that Muhammad had brought it from a Christian youth called Jabber. Allah (swt) refuted what they‚d said and responded:

"We know indeed that they say it is a man that taught him. The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear." [TMQ 16:103]

Since it is proved that the Qur‚an is neither the words of the Arabs nor the words of Muhammad, it is definitely the words of Allah, and consequently it is a miracle for the one who brought it. And because Muhammad brought the Qur‚an, and the Qur‚an is the words of Allah and His divine law, and because no one brings Allah‚s Shariőah (law) except the prophets and the messengers, then accordingly Muhammad must definitely be a prophet and messenger, by intellectual proof.

This is an intellectual proof for the belief in Allah and in the message of Muhammad, and that the Qur‚an is the speech of Allah.

Consequently, the belief in Allah comes through the rational way and this Iman must be by rational way. And because of it being so it becomes the basis for the belief in all matters beyond our senses and of all that Allah informed us. Because we believe in Allah, Who has divine attributes, we must definitely believe in everything that He (swt) has informed us of, whether it is mentally comprehended or beyond the minds capability. Henceforth, we must believe in the Day of Judgement, in paradise and hell, in reward and punishment, in angels, in jinn, in Shaytan and all others that the Qur‚an or the hadith mutawatir has mentioned. This belief, though it is through narration and hearing it is originally rational, since its origin is confirmed in an intellectual manner. Therefore, the Muslim‚s őaqeedah must depend on reason or on that whose origin is confirmed through the reason. Thus, Muslims must believe only in what is proven intellectually through the rational way or the definite narration, that is, what is confirmed by the Qur‚an and the hadith mutawatir. Belief in anything not deduced through these two methods (i.e. the mind and the text of the book and of the definite hadith) is prohibited, because őaqeedah should be based on certainty and assurance.

Therefore, there must be Iman in what is before this life, Allah (swt), and in what is after it, the Day of Resurrection. Since the commands of Allah constitute the relationship of this life with what is before it, besides the relationship of creation, and the reckoning of one‚s deeds in the life of this world is the relationship of the Hereafter with the life of this world, in addition to the relationship of Day of Judgement, there should be a relationship between the life of this world with that which is before it and what will be after it. Man‚s situation in this life must be constrained by this relationship. In other words, man must proceed in his life in accordance with Allah‚s system, and must believe that all his deeds herein will be reckoned with on the Day of Judgement.

By this discussion, the illuminated thought has been established concerning what is beyond the universe, man and life, and about what is before the life on earth and what is after it, and that there is a relationship with what is before and after it. Hence, the greatest problem has been completely solved by the Islamic őaqeedah.

Once man has achieved this solution, he can move to the thought about life on earth and to establish sound and productive concepts about it. This solution itself becomes the basis upon which the ideology is built, which serves as the method of intellectual progress (nahda) as well as the basis upon which the civilisation of this ideology rests, the basis from which its systems emanate, and the basis upon which the state is established. Thus, the basis upon which Islam is established, both in thought and method, is the Islamic belief or őaqeedah.

"O you who believe! Believe in Allah and His messenger, and the Book which He sent to His Messenger and the Book which He sent to those before (him). Any who denies Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Day of Judgement, has gone far, far astray." [TMQ 4:136]

After this has been confirmed and the Iman in it is an inevitable matter, every Muslim is obliged to believe in the Islamic Shariőah as a whole, because it is included in the glorious Qur‚an and the Messenger (prayer and peace be upon him) conveyed it. Otherwise, he would be a Kafir. Therefore, it is Kufr to deny any of the Ahkam Shariőah, whether these ahkam (judgements) are connected with ibadat, transactions, punishments, food, etc. Like rejection of the verse

"So establish regular prayer" [TMQ 2:43]

is the same as rejecting the verse

"But Allah has permitted trade and forbidden usury," [TMQ 2:275]

and is the same as rejecting the following verses:

"As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands," [TMQ 5:38]

"Forbidden to you (for food) are dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which has been invoked the name of any other than Allah." [TMQ 5:3]

The adherence to the Shariőah is not only based on the mind. Instead, one must surrender completely to all that was revealed from Allah, whether it seems reasonable or not.

"But no, by your Lord, they can have no (real) faith, until they make you judge in all the disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions, but accept them with the fullest submission." [TMQ 4:65]


Al-Qadaa wal Qadar

In surah A‚al-Imran, Allah (swt), says:

"Nor shall a soul die except by Allah‚s leave, the term being fixed by writing." [TMQ 3:145]

In surah al-A‚raf, He (swt) says:

"To every people is a term appointed. When their term is reached, not an hour can they delay it, nor (by an hour) can they advance it (in anticipation)." [TMQ 7:34]

In surah al-Hadeed, He (swt) says:

"No misfortune can happen on earth nor in your souls but it is recorded in a decree before We bring it into existence. That is truly easy for Allah." [TMQ 57 :22]

In surah al-Tawbah, He (swt) says:

"Say: Nothing will happen to us except what Allah has decreed for us. He is our Protector and in Allah, let the Believers place their trust." [TMQ 9:51]

In surah Sabah, He (swt) says:

"From Whom is not hidden the least little atom in the heavens or on earth, nor is there anything less than that, or greater, but it is in the Clear Record." [TMQ 34 :3]

In surah al-An‚am, He (swt) says:

"He it is Who gathers you at night and knows that which you commit by day. Then He raises you again to life, that the term appointed (for you) may be fulfilled. And afterward unto Him is your return and He will show you the truth of all that you did." [TMQ 6:60]

In surah al-Nisa‚a, He (swt) says:

"If some good befalls them, they say: This is from Allah. But if evil, they say: This is from you (O Prophet). Say: All things are from Allah. But what has come to these people, that they fail to understand a single fact?" [TMQ 4:78]

These ayat of the Qur‚an, and other ayat similar in meaning, are used by many as evidences in the question of Qada‚a and Qadar. They derive the following understanding from these ayat: Man is compelled to undertake his actions; Man undertakes his actions under compulsion through the will of Allah (swt); and that Allah (swt), Himself, created man and his actions. They try to support their opinion by the saying of the Supreme:

"But Allah has created you and your handiwork!" [TMQ 37:96]

They also support their point with the hadith of the Prophet (saw), such as: "The Holy Spirit inspired in my soul that no body will pass away until he accomplishes his livelihood, term of life (ajal), and decree."

The question of Qada‚a and Qadar has constituted much vital discussion amongst the Islamic schools of thought. In sum, those schools held the following views:

Ahle al-Sunnah: man had Kasb Ikhtiari in carrying out his actions. The Kasb Ikhtiari means man shifts his power and will towards performing the action by his choice. However, Allah (swt) subsequently brings the action into existence. Thus, man is reckoned on the outcome of this choice.

Al-Muőtazila were of the opinion that it is man himself who creates his deed and therefore since he initiates the action, he is judged based upon them.

Al-Jabriya held the opinion that Allah (swt), the Supreme, creates man and his work and thus man is not free but compelled to carry out his actions like the feather which floats in the air according to the direction of the wind.

However, when studying this question thoroughly one needs to know the basis upon which the argument is built. This basis should not be whether the actions of man are created by himself or by Allah (swt); It shouldn‚t be the knowledge of Allah (swt), i.e., that He (swt) knows that man will perform an action and that His (swt) knowledge covers man‚s actions; It‚s also not over the will of Allah (swt) related to man‚s actions, i.e., that these deeds must happen because of this will; It shouldn‚t be whether or not man‚s actions are recorded in the Al Lauh Al Mafouh (Protected Decree or Register), and thus having to carry out his actions in accordance with what is recorded.

Indeed, the basis of this question should not be any of these things, since they have no relationship to the subject of Reward and Punishment. It is merely related to the question of creation, the knowledge covering everything and the will of the Creator relative to all possible matters, and the Al Lauh Al Mafouh including everything. This relationship is different from the subject of Reward and Punishment for the action. In other words, is man obliged to perform an action, good or bad, or does he have a choice? And does man have the choice to perform an action or give it up, or doesn‚t he have the choice?

Any individual who observes the actions of man can conclude that He lives within two spheres:

A. The sphere which man dominates. This sphere is in his performance domain and includes actions performed by man by his choice.

B. The sphere which dominates him and in which he is involved. Actions which occur within this sphere occur without his choice, whether they originate from him or fall upon him.

In regards to the actions that materialise within the sphere that dominates man, man has no choice in them or in their existence. They can be divided into two kinds:

A. The part mandatory by the law of the universe.

B. The second being actions which occur beyond man‚s control (but are not part of the universal law).

As far as the actions which are part of the law of the universe are concerned, man is in complete and involuntary submission to them. He is obliged to act in accordance with a specific and unchangeable system. Subsequently, man‚s actions in this sphere occurs without his will and he is obliged and has no choice. Consequently, man came to this life without his will and he will leave it without his will. He cannot fly in the air with his body, walk in his natural being on water, nor choose the colour of his eyes. Man did not produce the shape of his head nor the size of his body. Indeed, it was Allah (swt) who created all of this without any input from man. Allah (swt) created the laws of the Universe, regulated the Universe by this law, and had the Universe run according to these laws without the possibility of change.

Actions which are beyond man‚s control and yet are not part of the universal law, but cannot be avoided are deterministic. Either he is the subject or the object (unintentionally) of these actions. Examples of such actions are if someone on a wall accidentally falls on a person and thus kills that person, or if someone shoots at a bird and without any intent hits a person and kills him, or if a car goes off the way, train derails, or plane should crash, without any ability on the part of the pilot or the driver to avoid the accident, the passengers die. All of these examples which emanated from man or involved him materialised without his will and were beyond his ability to control them. Those actions are within the sphere which dominates man, yet they are not part of universal law. They occur from him or affect him without his will and beyond his control sphere. All of the actions which occur within the sphere that dominates man are termed Qada, since Allah (swt) has predetermined them. Therefore, man is not reckoned about these actions, whether they are classified as beneficial, harmful, liked or disliked - although Allah (swt) alone knows the good and bad consequences of these actions - because man has no influence on them. Man does not have enough information about them nor the manner in which they are brought into existence. Additionally, man is unable to initiate or to avoid them at all. Man must believe in this Qada and that this Qada is from Allah (swt).

As for Qadar, it is evident that the actions which occur, either in the sphere dominating man or in the sphere that man dominates, emanate from or upon things in the universe, man and life. Allah (swt) created certain attributes in these objects. For example, He (swt) created in fire the attribute of burning, in wood the attribute of catching fire, and in the blade the attribute of cutting. He (swt) made the attributes an integral and perpetual part of the objects according to the laws of the universe. When it happens that the attributes are no longer present, it means Allah has eliminated them and such an event would be unnatural. These are miracles and only happen to the. Likewise, in the manner that Allah (swt) created attributes in the objects, He created in man instincts and organic needs. He (swt) created in the instincts and organic needs specific attributes. Hence, He (swt) created in the instinct of reproduction the attribute of sexual inclination and worship, and survival. He (swt) created the organic needs the attributes of hunger/thirst, and He (swt) made these attributes accompany those instincts and organic needs according to the necessity of existence. The particular attributes that Allah (swt) has created in objects, instincts and organic needs are collectively termed as Qadar. This is because Allah (swt) alone created the objects, instincts, organic needs and pre-characterised (Qaddara) them with particular attributes. These attributes are not produced by the objects nor does man have any input or influence on their existence. Therefore, man must believe that it is Allah (swt) who has decreed these attributes in objects. However, these attributes can be used as means for an action by man. Thus actions will either be according to the commands of Allah and is thus good, or contradicting his commands and therefore bad (using objects with attributes or responding to his instincts and organic needs). Man‚s action can conform or run counter with the commands of Allah (swt), thus doing good if it is in conformance with Islam and bad if it is not.

Accordingly, all actions - good or bad - that occur within the sphere that dominates man are from Allah (swt). Also, all the attributes of objects and the instincts and organic needs - whether resulting in good or bad - are from Allah (swt). Consequently, a Muslim must believe that Qada‚a - good or bad - is from Allah (swt) i.e. that actions beyond his sphere of influence are from Allah. He must also believe that Qadar - good or bad - is from Allah (swt) i.e. he must believe that attributes of things found in their nature are from Allah whether those resulting in good or in bad effects and unto which man has no influence. Thus man‚s lifespan (ajal), provision (rizq), and himself (ruh) are all from Allah (swt). On the same token, the sexual inclination, and tendency towards ownership found in the instincts or reproduction and survival, and thirst and hunger, of the organic needs, are all established in man by Allah (swt).

This is in respect to the actions that occur within the sphere that dominates man and the attributes of all things. As for the sphere that man dominates, it is the sphere in which he proceeds freely according to the system he chooses, whether it is Allah‚s law (Shariőah) or any other. In this sphere, actions carried out by man or involving him occur by his free will. For example, he walks, eats, drinks and travels at anytime, wherever or whatever he likes. Likewise, he refrains from doing any of these things when he likes. He also uses fire and cuts with a knife when he chooses. He satisfies the instincts of reproduction and ownership and hunger of his stomach as he likes. He freely performs or abstains from any action. Therefore, man is reckoned on these acts which occur within this sphere.

 

The attributes in objects, instincts, and organic needs are ordained and are an integral part of creation established by Allah (swt). They influence the outcome of the actions but do not in themselves initiate the action. It is man himself who initiates the action when using them. Hence, the sexual inclination in the instinct of reproduction has the potential for good and bad, and the hunger present in the organic need has the potential for good and bad. The one who acts good or bad is man and not the instinct or the organic need. This is because Allah (swt) created for man the mind which has the ability to comprehend, distinguish, and decide. He also guides man to the awareness of the path of good and bad.

"And we showed him (the man) the two paths (of good and bad)." [TMQ 90:10]

Allah also creates in man the comprehension of vice and righteousness.

"And inspired it (with conscience of) what is wrong for it and what is right for it." [TMQ 91:8]

When man responds to his instincts and organic needs in a manner agreeing with the commands of Allah (swt), he performs the good and proceeds in the way of righteousness. When he responds to the instincts and organic needs deviating from the commands of Allah (swt), then he performs the bad and proceeds in the way of vice. Therefore, the good and bad emanates from man. He responds to the needs according to the commands of Allah and thus acts in a good way or responds in a way deviating from Allah‚s (swt) commands and then acts badly. Consequently man is reckoned on this basis about his actions which occur in the sphere that he dominates, thus he is either rewarded or punished because he has undertaken those actions freely without any coercion.

Although the attributes of the instincts and organic needs are from Allah (swt), and their potential for good and bad is also from Allah (swt), Allah (swt) didn‚t establish them in a way forcing man to use them, whether in a way that satisfies or angers Allah (swt) i.e. in good or bad. This is similar to the attribute of burning which does not compel one to burn neither in the burning which satisfies Allah (swt) or in the burning which angers Him (swt) i.e. in good and bad. However, these attributes that are inherent in the objects, instincts, and organic needs are created in a specific manner and will manifest themselves whenever man fulfils the instincts and organic needs in the afforded way.

When Allah (swt) created man with his instincts, organic needs, and the mind, He (swt) endowed him with the choice to carry out or abstain from an action. Allah (swt) did not compel him to carry out or to abstain from the action. Furthermore, He did not make the attributes of the objects, instincts and organic needs as compelling factors that make man carry out or abstain from an action. Man is therefore free, to perform or abstain from an action by the use of his mind. Allah (swt) made man accountable because of the latter having a discerning mind. Accordingly, Allah (swt) will reward man for performing the good because his mind chose to obey the commands of Allah (swt) and Allah (swt) would punish for performing the bad because his mind chose to disobey the commands of Allah (swt) by responding to his instincts and organic needs in a way contrary to the commands of Allah (swt). Therefore, man‚s accountability is righteous and just, because he is free to carry out his action without compulsion. In this question, the Qada‚a and Qadar is irrelevant. It‚s rather to do with man carrying out his actions freely and therefore he is responsible for what he receives. Allah (swt), the Supreme, says:

"Every soul is a pledge for its deed" [TMQ 74:38]

As for the knowledge of Allah (swt) (őIlmu Allah), it does not force man to carry out an action. Allah knows that man is going to freely undertake an action. To carry out this action is not based on the knowledge of Allah (swt), rather, the knowledge of Allah (swt) implies He knows what action man is going to carry out. With regards to "the writing in the Al-Lauh al-Mahfouh", it is an expression for the knowledge of Allah of everything.

With regards to the will of Allah (swt) (Iradatu Allah) also, it does not compel man to carry out any action. Its meaning, however, is that nothing can take place in his realm without Allah‚s (swt) will i.e. nothing takes place against His (swt) will. Thus, if man carried out an action and Allah (swt) did not compel or prevent him from doing so, and instead left him to act freely, without any compulsion, then man has acted according to the will of Allah (swt). Man‚s action was undertaken by himself and by his choice, and the will of Allah (swt) did not compel him to carry out the action.

This is the issue of al qada‚a wal qadar which will stimulate man to do good and avoid evil when realising that Allah (swt) is watching him and will account him for his actions and that he has endowed him with the choice to act or abstain. If man does not choose the right actions, he will be severely reprimanded and punished. Therefore, we find the true believer, who understands the concept of al qada‚a wal qadar and who is fully acquainted with the mental faculties and decision making capabilities that Allah (swt) has endowed him with, very careful in observing Allah‚s (swt) orders and being afraid of Him (swt). He endeavours to comply with the commands of Allah (swt) and to abstain from what is forbidden, because of his fear of the punishment of Allah (swt) and his yearning for Paradise. Ultimately, the believer yearns to attain that which is greater than all of this, namely the pleasure of Allah (swt) (Ridwan Allah).


The Intellectual Leadership of Islam (Al-Qiyadatul Fikriyatu fil Islam)

Whenever the level of thinking declines, the wataniyah (patriotic bond) amongst people arises. It arises in a land to which they are attached. The survival instinct pushes them to defend themselves and the land they live on and automatically leads to the patriotic bond. This patriotic bond is the weakest and lowest level of bond, it is present amongst animals and birds as well as human beings.

It manifests itself in an emotional manner and is necessary in the event of a foreign aggression against the land, either when attacked or occupied. The patriotic bond never arises when the land is safe from aggression. It ceases when the foreigner is repelled or banished from the homeland. Therefore, this bond is primitive.

Moreover, when the thinking level is narrow, the qawmiyah (nationalism) arises. It is similar to a family bond though in a broader sense. Once the survival instinct is deeply rooted in the individual it manifests towards the inclination to dominate others. The inclination to dominate is individualistic in a man of low intellect. However, as the individuals horizon broadens his inclination to dominate widens, thus his attempts to dominate increases from his family, then to his people in the homeland and once that is achieved the dominance of his people over all other people becomes the objective. The struggle for dominance creates internal feuds amongst the members of the family. Hence, when the dominance within the family is settled then the feud transfers to a feud between his family and other families until the dominance is settled in favour of one family or a group of people from different families. In the end, the conflict arises between his people and others for dominance and achieving a high standard of living.

Racialism prevails amongst the people sharing this bond who are subject to whims and selfishness. Consequently, it is an inhumane bond and it remains exposed to internal feuds if it is not preoccupied with external conflicts.

Therefore, the patriotic bond is unsuitable for the following three reasons:

1. It is a primitive bond not serving to bind man with man in his quest for revival.

2. It is an emotional bond arising from the survival instinct of defending oneself. Such an emotional bond is liable to change and does not serve as a perpetual bond binding human beings.

3. It is a temporary bond that exists in the case of threat, but in the state of stability, which is the normal state of man, it does not exist. Therefore, the patriotic bond does not deserve to be a bond amongst mankind.

Whereas, the nationalistic bond is also unsuitable for the following three reasons:

1. It is a tribal bond which does not serve to bind man with man in his way for revival.

2. It is an emotional bond that arises from the survival instinct with its inclination to dominate.

3. It is an inhuman bond which causes conflicts for domination among people. Therefore, it does not deserve to be a bond between mankind.

As for the other invalid bonds which are mistakenly taken as bonds they are:

- Bond of self-interest (maslaha)

- Spiritual bond from which no system emanates.

The bond of self interest is a short lived bond and does not serve to bind mankind, since it is vulnerable to compromise in the pursuit of greater interests. Consequently, it ceases to exist when the interests are outweighed and if the interests differ the bond terminates. Additionally, it separates people from each other and when the interests are attained this bond ceases to exist. Therefore, it is a dangerous bond for its adherents.

The spiritual bond from which no system emanates appears in the practical status of religiosity and does not manifest itself in the walks of life. Therefore, the spiritual bond is partial and an impractical bond not suitable to bind people in the affairs of life. Hence, the Christian dogma did not serve as a bond amongst the European nations, though it is embraced by them, because it is a spiritual bond devoid of a system.

Consequently all the aforementioned bonds do not serve to bind man with man in his quest for revival. The only true bond which binds mankind in life is the rational doctrine from which a system emanates. And this is the ideological bond.

The ideology (mabda) is a rational doctrine from which a system emanates. The doctrine (őaqeedah) is a comprehensive idea about the universe, man, life, what preceded this life, what is to follow it, and the relationship of this life with what preceded it and what is to follow it. As for the system that emanates from this doctrine, it is the solution for man‚s problems, the method for implementing those solutions, preserving the doctrine, and conveying the ideology to others.

The method of implementing the solutions, preserving the doctrine, and conveying the ideology constitutes the tariqa (method) while the őaqeedah and the solutions constitute the fikra (idea). Consequently, the ideology is composed of the idea and the method.

The ideology comes into existence through the mind of a man either through revelation sent to man from Allah (swt) combined with an order to convey it or through a genius capacity acquired by a man.

As to the ideology which comes into existence in the mind of a man revealed from Allah (swt). This is the correct ideology since, it is Allah (swt) who is the Creator of the universe, man and life. Therefore, it is conclusively a definite proven ideology. Whereas, the ideology which sparks in the mind of man because of his genius is false since it is developed by a limited mind which is not all knowing. Furthermore, man‚s ability to set a system is liable to disparity, differences, contradictions, and influence of the environment in which he lives. A fact which produces a contradictory system leading to man‚s misery. Therefore, the ideology which arises in a man‚s mind is false in its őaqeedah and system.

Consequently, the basis of the ideology is a comprehensive idea about the universe, man, and life and the method which brings the ideology into existence and implemented in all aspects of life, to ensure the existence of the ideology is mandatory. The comprehensive idea is the basis of the ideology since it constitutes the őaqeedah and the ideological leadership. Based on the őaqeedah, the ideological direction of man and his viewpoint in life is defined. Moreover, all thoughts are built upon it, and the solutions for life‚s problems emanate from it. The method is essential, because if the system that emanates from the doctrine does not include the method of implementing such a system, preserving the őaqeedah, and conveying daőwah, then the idea would turn to be a hypothetical and fanciful philosophy in pages of books without any effect in the life.

Hence, the doctrine, the solutions for the problems, and the method are all necessary for the ideology to come into existence. However, the mere presence of the idea and the method from which a system emanates does not denote that the ideology is correct, it simply denotes that it is an ideology, and nothing more. The matter which determines the validity of the ideology is the őaqeedah. Because the őaqeedah is the intellectual basis upon which every idea is built, views are defined, and from which every solution and method emanates. Therefore, if the intellectual basis is correct the ideology will be correct, and if the basis is false the ideology will be false.

If the comprehensive idea (doctrine) is in harmony with mans nature and is built upon the mind it will be correct. However, if it disagrees with mans nature and is not built upon the mind it will be false. The compatibility with mans nature means that the őaqeedah recognises the natural weakness and need of man for the Creator, the Sovereign, i.e., it agrees with the instinct of religiosity. Building the doctrine on the mind means that it is not built on materialism or a solution arrived through compromise.

If we examine the ideologies that exist in the world, we will find only three: Capitalism, Communism and Islam. The first two ideologies are implemented by states, while Islam is not carried by a state, but rather by individuals within different peoples, nevertheless it is internationally existent in the whole globe.

Capitalism is based upon the separation of religion from life. This idea constitutes its doctrine, its ideological leadership and its intellectual basis. According to this intellectual basis man lays the system for life and it is necessary to preserve for man the following types of freedom: freedom of belief, freedom of opinion, freedom of ownership and personal freedom. The Capitalist economic system has arisen out of the freedom of ownership and capitalism has become the most prominent feature that has sprung out from the doctrine of this ideology. Thus, this ideology is called Capitalism named after its most prominent aspect.

As for democracy, which is ascribed to this ideology, it stems from man laying his own system. The people are therefore, the source of authority. They determine the structure and function of the system, employ the ruler to govern them, and take away the authority from the ruler when they want to and establish for him the laws they like. This is because ruling is a contract between the people and the ruler to rule according to a system people choose to be applied.

Though democracy is a part of capitalism, it is less prominent than the economic system. Because the Capitalist economy in the West influences the government to the extent that the Capitalists are effectively the real rulers in the Capitalist countries which implement Capitalism. Moreover, democracy is not limited to this ideology, since the Communists also claim to be democratic and pretend that governing belongs to the people. It is therefore more accurate to call this ideology the Capitalist Ideology or Capitalism.

This ideology emerged when the emperors and kings of Europe and Russia were using religion as a means to exploit the people, transgress against them and suck their blood. The clergy was used as an instrument for this. There arose, as a result of the oppression, a bloody struggle in which the philosophers and thinkers went as far as denying religion. While, others acknowledged religion but called for its separation from life. Eventually, the opinion of the majority of the philosophers and thinkers settled on one idea, the separation of religion from life. It naturally resulted in the separation of religion from the state. Thus, the opinion settled on avoiding the discussion of religion, whether in denial or recognition, and instead confined discussion to the necessity of separating religion from life. This notion constituted a compromise between the clergy, on the one hand, who sought to control everything in the name of religion, and the philosophers and thinkers, on the other hand, who denied religion and theocracy. Therefore, this idea does not deny religion nor does it allow it to interfere in the life, instead it just separates it from life. Consequently, the doctrine which was embraced by the West is the separation of religion from life, and this doctrine is the intellectual basis upon which all thoughts are built, the basis for the intellectual direction of man and his viewpoint in life. It is the basis for solving all of life‚s problems. It is the intellectual leadership carried and propagated in the world by the West.

 

The separation of religion from life implicitly recognises religion, and by doing so, it recognises that there is a Creator of the universe, man and life, and that there will be a Day of Resurrection. Since, these are the origins of religion as a religion. It provides an idea about the universe, man, life, and what preceded this life and what is to follow it because it didn‚t deny the existence of religion. When it claimed the separation of life from religion it actually confirmed its implicit existence. Therefore it proved the existence of religion and gave the idea that there is no relationship between this life with what preceded it and with what is to follow it, and that religion is a mere relationship between the individual and his Creator. Accordingly, this doctrine (separation of religion from life), by its all inclusive concept, constitutes a comprehensive idea about the universe, man and life. Thus capitalism, by this explanation, is an ideology like any other.

Socialism which led to Communism views the universe, man, and life as only matter and that matter is the origin of all things. The evolving of this matter brought all things into existence and thus there is nothing beyond matter. Therefore, matter has no beginning and no end, is everlasting and self-existing, i.e. not created by anyone. Communists, therefore, deny that matter is created by a Creator. They deny the spiritual aspect of matter and view the recognition of the spiritual aspect as constituting a threat to life. Consequently, they maintain that religion is the opium of the masses which sedates and hinders them from action. They believe in nothing but matter, even thought is claimed to be a reflection of matter on the brain. Hence, matter, for them, is the origin of thought and the origin of everything and through the materialistic evolution all things are brought into existence. Accordingly, they deny the existence of the Creator and consider matter to be eternal, and thus, they deny what preceded this life and what is to follow it and fail to recognise anything except this life.

In spite of the differences between these two ideologies in respect to their view about the universe, man and life, yet both agree that the ideals to be sought by man are the sublime values that man lays down for himself, while happiness is to enjoy the optimum level of sensual gratification which in their opinion are the means to happiness, even happiness itself. The two ideologies also agree upon preserving the personal freedom of the individual so man can act as he likes, however he desires, as long as he sees his happiness in that action. Therefore, the personal freedom of the individual is a part of what is sanctified by these two ideologies.

Both ideologies differ in their view of the individual and society. Capitalism is an individualistic ideology which assumes society to be composed of individuals. It pays secondary attention to society and concentrates its attention on the individual. Therefore, it considers it necessary to secure the freedoms of the individual. In order to ensure this freedom, every member works for the sake of society. Freedom of belief is, therefore, one of the things sanctified by this ideology. Freedom of ownership is also sanctified and not restricted by its philosophy but by the government which intervenes to guarantee the liberties. The government implements these restrictions by the police and through law enforcement. The state, however, is considered a means and not an end in itself. Sovereignty ultimately belongs to the individuals and not to the state. Accordingly, capitalism carries an ideological leadership, which is the separation of religion from life‚s affairs, and on the basis of this leadership capitalism implements its laws, calls for, and attempts to be applied everywhere.

Socialism and Communism is an ideology which views society as a collective group consisting of human beings and their relationship with nature. Thus, people will submit to this relationship inevitably and automatically. This collective is one single unit of man, nature, and relationships, and all constitute one whole and not parts separated from each other. Nature is considered to be a part of mans character, the part he carries in himself. man does not evolve without being connected with this part of his personality, i.e., nature, because mans relationship with nature is like the relationship of the thing with its own essence. Accordingly, society is considered to be one unit whose three elements evolve together as a whole. And thus man has to revolve within this group like a spoke in a wheel. Therefore, Communists hold no freedom of belief or economical ownership for the individual; belief and economy are defined by the state. Consequently, the state is also one of the things sanctified by this ideology. From this materialistic philosophy, life‚s systems have emanated and the economic system was considered the primary basis and the main factor in determining other systems. Hence Socialism and Communism carries an ideological leadership which is materialism and dialectic materialism and on this basis it implements its systems, calls for them and attempts to apply them everywhere.

As for Islam, it holds that beyond the universe, man and life, there is a Creator, who created them all. Therefore, its basis is the conviction in the existence of Allah (swt). This őaqeedah has defined the spiritual aspect in everything, which means the creation of the universe, man and life by a creator. Likewise, the relationship of the universe with Allah (swt) and the relationship of the life and of man with Allah (swt) is the spiritual aspect of the universe, life and man. The spirit (ruh), therefore is man‚s comprehension of his relationship with Allah (swt).

The belief in Allah (swt) must also be linked to the belief in the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw), his Message, and that the Qur‚an is the speech of Allah (swt). Hence, it is obligatory to accept all that the Qur‚an has informed us of.

Accordingly, the Islamic őaqeedah makes it compulsory to believe in what had preceded this life (Allah), and to believe in that which is after this life - the Day of Resurrection. It also obliges man to believe that in this life he is restricted by the commands of Allah (swt); which constitutes the relationship with what preceded this life. Man will be reckoned as to whether he obeyed these commands. This accountability constitutes the relationship of this life with what is to follow it. Inevitably, a Muslim must realise his relationship with Allah (swt) when undertaking any action, and direct his actions according to the commands of Allah (swt). This is the meaning of mixing matter and spirit. The ultimate aim of directing Muslims actions according to the commands of Allah (swt) is to attain His (swt) pleasure. While the immediate end sought in undertaking the action is the value the action yields.

Therefore, the ideal aims to protect the society are not instituted by man, but rather by the commands of Allah (swt) which are consistent, neither adapting, changing, nor evolving. The protection of the human race, mind, human dignity, private property, religion, security and state are all fixed ultimate aims to protect society, and they are not subject to change or development. Islam has assigned a firm penal code to protect these aims. It is obligatory to protect these aims, because they are the commands of Allah (swt) and not because they produce material value. Accordingly, the Muslim and the state undertake all actions according to the commands of Allah (swt), because they and only they (the commands) should govern all of mans affairs. Undertaking actions according to the commands of Allah (swt) provides a Muslim with tranquillity. Hence, happiness is not satisfying the sensual gratification, it is rather attaining the pleasure of Allah (swt).

In respect to mans organic needs and instincts, Islam has organised them in a way that ensures their satisfaction such as the spiritual requirement, along with the dietary and sexual needs. However, this is not done at the expense of some over the others, or by suppressing or setting others loose, or setting all of them loose. Instead, Islam has co-ordinated all of them and satisfied them through a precise system which produces delight and comfort for man and prevents him from lapsing to the level of the animal which satisfies its instincts in a chaotic manner.

To maintain this organisation of organic needs and instincts, Islam considers the community to be an indivisible whole, and rather views the individual as an attached part of the community, and being a part of the community, the individual is not perceived as a spoke in a wheel, rather the individual is viewed as a being a part from a whole like a hand being a part of the body. Thus, Islam took care of the individual as part of a community and not separate from her such care leads to the protection of the community. At the same time, Islam took care of the community not as being a whole devoid of parts, but in her capacity as a whole comprising parts i.e. individuals. So this given care leads to the protection of these individuals, each as a part of the community. Prophet Muhammad (saw) said: "The example of those who maintain Allah‚s limits and those who surpassed the limit is like the example of those who share a boat. Some would occupy the lower while others the upper deck. The occupants of the lower deck would have to go to the upper deck to have access to the water. They said, why don‚t we drill a hole in the lower deck to directly access the water so as not to cause any inconvenience to those above us. If those on the upper deck allowed this to happen then the entire boat with all the passengers would sink. However, if they prevented them from doing so then all would be saved".

This outlook of the community and the individual establishes a distinct concept about society. The individuals as part of the community must have thoughts that bind them together by which they live. They must also share the same sentiments which affect and motivate them. Additionally, they must have one system to address all of their life‚s problems. Hence, society is composed of individuals, thoughts, sentiments and systems. man has to be bonded in this life by these thoughts, sentiments and systems. A Muslim is, therefore, bonded in all matters of this life by Islam and he does not have freedoms at all, since a Muslim‚s őaqeedah is restricted by Islam‚s commands and is not left unrestricted. Consequently any one who renounces Islam is considered to have committed a capital crime and his apostasy is met with capital punishment if he does not repent. Similarly, personal matters are restricted by the system of Islam. Hence, zina is a crime for which the adulterer is severely punished without any pardon and in public. Allah (swt) says:

"And let a party of the believers witness their punishment." [TMQ 24:2]

Drinking khamr is a crime that also invokes punishment. Likewise, acts of aggression against others constitutes a crime that is treated case by case according to the type of aggression, such as false accusation of zina, murder etc. Economic aspects are restricted by the Shariőah, by means of ownership permitted by the Shariőah, and the manner by which Islam defined private property. Private property is defined as the Shariőah permission to derive benefit from the owned property.

 

Consequently, transgressing these restrictions is considered a crime, which differs according to the type of transgression, such as theft, robbery, etc. Thus, a state which protects both the community and the individual and implements the system in the society is mandatory. It is necessary that the ideology influences its adherents so that its protection is naturally coming from the people themselves. Accordingly, it is the ideology which restricts and protects the entire society while it is the state which implements the legislation set by the ideology. Sovereignty, therefore, belongs to Allah (swt) and His (swt) Shariőah not to the state or the nation, though, the authority belongs to the nation and is practised by the state. Hence, the state is the method for implementing the system, although the individuals piety (taqwa) of Allah (swt) can be relied upon for his adherence to the laws of Islam. Therefore, it is necessary to have the legislation implemented by the state and orienting the individual to comply by Islam through his taqwa.

Islam is therefore comprised of an őaqeedah and systems and the Islamic ideology is both a fikra and a method which is an integral part of the fikra. Its system emanates from its őaqeedah and its hadarah (civilisation) constitutes a unique way of life. The Islamic method in carrying the dawőah is by implementation of Islam through the State and carrying it as an intellectual leadership to the world which should be the basis for understanding and practising Islam. Applying Islam on the people who are governed by the system of Islam is considered carrying a daőwah, because applying Islam on non-Muslims is considered to be one aspect of the practical method for the daőwah. It is through this implementation this vast Muslim world came into existence.

To summarise three ideologies exist in the world, Capitalism, Socialism and the third ideology is Islam. Each of these ideologies has its own doctrine from which a system emanates, a measure for man‚s actions, a particular view of society, and a method to implement the system.

As for őaqeedah the Communist ideology holds that matter is the origin of things and that all things emanate from is by means of materialistic evolving i.e. dialectic materialism.

The Capitalist ideology believes that religion must be separated from life which results in the separation of religion from the state. Hence, the Capitalists don‚t discuss the issue whether a Creator exists or not, they merely discuss the point which says that the Creator has no right to interfere in the life regardless of whether his existence is acknowledged or not. Consequently, those acknowledging the existence of a Creator and those who deny it are equal in the Capitalist doctrine which is the separation of religion from life.

As for Islam, it believes that Allah (swt) created everything in existence and that He (swt) sent prophets and messengers with His (swt) deen to human beings, and that man will account for his actions on the Day of Judgement. Therefore, Islam‚s őaqeedah is the belief (Iman) in Allah (swt), His angels, His books, His messengers, and the Qada‚a and Qadar, the good and bad of which are from Allah (swt). However, regarding the manner in which the system emanates from the doctrine, Communism maintains that the system is taken from the tools of production, thus the feudal system was the product of the dominant mode of production in the feudal society, namely the axe. The evolution of society to Capitalism made machinery become the tool of production, thus the Capitalist system is taken from this mode of production through dialectic materialism. Capitalism in separating religion from life, maintains that it is man who sets the system for this life based upon his situation. Islam considers that Allah (swt) has assigned a system for man to proceed in this life. He (swt) has sent Muhammad (saw) with this system which was revealed to him (saw) and man must follow it. Hence, a Muslim studies the problem and deduces its solution from the Qur‚an and the Sunnah.

As the measure for actions, Communism considers materialism, i.e. the materialistic system, so as matter evolves so does the measure. Capitalism considers the measure to be benefit, and on this basis, actions are evaluated. Islam considers the halal and the haram as the measure, i.e. the commands of Allah (swt). Accordingly, the halal is performed and the haram shunned; the measure neither evolves nor changes, nor is it influenced by benefit, and thus it is only the Shariőah which governs.

As for society Communism considers it consisting of a whole unit comprising of earth, modes of production, nature, and man which all are considered to be matter. When nature and its content evolve man evolves with it, thus the society evolves. Consequently, society is subjugated to evolving materialism. Therefore, man has to only bring forth the contradictions to promote this evolutionary process. When the society evolves the individual evolves with it and thus man revolves with the society like a spoke in a wheel.

Capitalism views society as composed of individuals. Hence, if the individual‚s affairs are managed the society‚s affairs will be managed. Care is therefore, only given to the individual while the government acts only on the individual‚s behalf. Consequently, this ideology is individualistic.

Islam views the őaqeedah as the basis of society. This őaqeedah includes its thoughts, sentiments and the system which emanates from it. Thus, the Islamic society is brought into being when the Islamic thoughts and sentiments dominate and the Islamic system is implemented among the people.

Society is therefore comprised of man, thoughts, sentiments and the system. For a person together with another person constitutes only a group. A society comes into existence when people adopt the same thoughts, share the sentiments, and apply the same system upon them. When people live together there arise common interests which requires. However, if thoughts, sentiments and systems this relationship amongst the people are united. If the thoughts about it or sentiments towards it or systems are different, then the relationship would not exists and consequently the society would not exist.

Therefore, society consists of man, thoughts, sentiments and systems, because these alone establish continuous relationships and make a group of people a distinct society.

If all people in a society were Muslims, but the thoughts they adopted were democratic and Capitalistic, their sentiments were spiritual, patriotic or nationalistic, and the system applied upon them was democratic and Capitalistic then the society would be non Islamic, even if the majority of the people were Muslims.

Concerning the implementation of the system, Communism considers that the state alone implements the system through an iron fist. The state develops the system and takes care of their affair on behalf of the individual and community. The government in capitalism oversees the sanctification of liberties. So if someone violated the freedom of an individual, then the government will act to prevent the violation. However, if someone did not violate the liberty of others rather, exploited and took away and took the individuals right, with his consent, then there would be no violation of liberty. The state would not interfere because again the state exists to maintain the liberties.

Islam considers that the system is implemented by the individual‚s consciousness (taqwa) and by the state through: the awareness in society about Islam‚s justice, the co-operation between both the nation and the ruler through amr bil maruf wa nahiy anil munkar (enjoining the good and forbidding the evil) and the authority of the state.

The state takes care of the community affairs and the affairs but not the individual unless if he is unable to do so and the system does not evolve at all. The state has the authority to adopt the rules (Ahkam Shariőah) when there is more than one opinion of ijtihad on an issue.

The intellectual leadership of Islam is comparable with man‚s nature and in spite of its depth it is easily understood. One‚s heart and mind are quickly opened to it, eagerly trying to understand it, and pondering over its details with appreciation. This is because the instinct of religiosity is part of man. Every man is religious by nature and no power can remove from him this innate quality because its deeply rooted in him. Man, by nature, feels incomplete, and that there is a greater power which deserves to be sanctified. Man‚s instinct of religiosity arises from his natural weakness thus constituting his need for the Creator.

It is a permanent instinct in man with specific manifestation requiring sanctification. Consequently, mankind is religious and has always worshipped something throughout history. Humanity has worshipped man, planets, stones, animals, fire and other things. Islam, however, with its doctrine came to lead man away from worshipping created things to the worship of Allah (swt) who created everything. The advent of the materialistic ideology, which denies the existence of Allah (swt) and our relationship with Him (swt), could not put an end to this innate religiousness. However, it succeeded in shifting man‚s conception of power greater than himself to its reverence to the ideology and its advocates.

Thus, it shifted people‚s sanctification of worshipping Allah (swt) to worshipping man, and away from venerating the ayat of Allah (swt) to venerating mans words. So it brought backwardness in mans worship. It could not put an end to religion, which is innate. Instead, it distorted and diverted it in a reactionary way.

Therefore, the intellectual leadership of the materialistic ideology (Communism) is a negative leadership incoherent with man‚s nature and thus it is a failure from this perspective. It manipulates the people through appealing to their stomach. It attracts the deprived, the poor, and the defeated ones. Those who adhere to it are low in their thinking, the failures, anarchists and mentally devious people who aspire to be known as intellectuals when they arrogantly talk about the theory of dialectics whose failure is proved by both the intellect and in reality. It has to resort to force and brutality to subjugate people to its ideology. Hence, oppression, suppression, anarchy, turmoil, destruction and agitation are its most important instruments.

The Capitalistic ideological leadership likewise disagrees with man‚s nature, i.e., the instinct of religiosity. This instinct of religiosity becomes apparent in sanctification as well as in management of man‚s affairs in life. The inconsistency and contradictions appear when man undertakes this management, a matter which testifies to man‚s inability.

Consequently, a deen revealed from the Creator must manage man‚s affairs in life. The separation of religion from life contradicts man‚s nature. The presence of religion in life does not mean viewing all of life‚s daily functions as religious rites. Rather, the presence of religion in life means to address all of man‚s problems with Allah‚s (swt) system, a system that emanates from the őaqeedah which agrees with man‚s nature. To remove this and replace it with a system which emanates from the idea of separation of religion from life disagrees with man‚s nature. Therefore, the intellectual leadership of Capitalism is negative since it fails to address man‚s nature. It separates religion from life, banishes religiousness from life by making it an individualistic affair, and prevents Allah‚s (swt) system from addressing man‚s affairs.

The Islamic intellectual leadership is positive since it establishes the mind as the basis for the belief in the existence of Allah (swt). Islam draws man‚s attention to the elements of the universe, man and life to conclusively and decisively deduce the existence of Allah (swt), the Creator of these things. This defines for man the utmost perfection which he innately searches for and does not exist in him, the life, or the universe and directs man‚s mind to this utmost Supreme, comprehending His (swt) existence, and believing in Him (swt).

The Communist intellectual leadership is built upon materialism and not the intellect. It considers that matter existed before thought and matter to be the origin of all things, hence it is materialistic. The Capitalist intellectual leadership however, is based upon a compromise reached after a bloody struggle between the clergy and the intellectuals which had lasted for many centuries and it resulted with the idea of separation of religion from the state. Therefore, both the Communist and Capitalist intellectual leaderships failed since they contradict man‚s nature and are not built upon the intellect.

In conclusion, of the three doctrines, only the Islamic doctrine is correct, because it is built upon the mind and it agrees with man‚s nature and, thus man positively responds to it, whilst the other doctrines are not built upon the mind and they disagree with man‚s nature.

The Communist doctrine maintains that matter precedes thought thus it is built on matter and not on the mind. It maintains that thought is the reflection of the matter onto the brain. Prior to the reflection of the matter onto the brain there was no thought, and accordingly everything is built upon matter. Consequently, the origin of the Communist intellectual leadership is matter and not thought.

This perspective is wrong for two reasons:

There is no reflection between the matter and brain. The brain does not reflect upon matter, neither does matter reflect on the brain. Reflection requires that objects be endowed with the characteristic of reflection such as a mirror. This characteristic is not possessed by the brain nor matter. Rather, the sensation of the matter is transferred to the brain through the senses. The sensation of the matter to the brain is not a reflection of matter to the brain, nor a reflection of the brain to the matter it is only the sensation of the matter. In this regard there is no difference between sight and the other senses in the sensing of the matter. Thus sensation occurs by smelling, hearing, touching and tasting as it occurs by seeing. Accordingly, man senses things through his five senses, and things are not reflected on the brain, rather what occurs is a sensation of the things.

Sense alone does not produce thought, but merely produces sensation, i.e., a sense of the tangible object. Sensation, plus sensation, plus a million sensations will still only produce sensations and no thought at all.

In order for man to think, he must have previous information through which he can explain the sensed matter. For example, if a book in the ancient Syriac language was given to someone who has no previous information about the Syriac language, he would be able to only sense it through sight and touch. Even if the individual would repeat this sensation a million times, he still would not be able to understand a single word of the book unless he is given the relevant information about the Syriac language. Thereafter, he will start thinking and understanding. Let us take another example of a child with sound senses but no previous information. If we were to place in front of the child a piece of gold, brass and a stone the child would not be able to comprehend them, no matter how many times it senses these things. However, if the child was given previous information about them, he would use this information to comprehend them. Were the child to grow up to be twenty years of age without any information he would remain as his first day of life regardless of the biological growth in the brain. Since it is not the brain that enables man to comprehend, rather it is the previous information together with the brain and the sensed object.

As for the instinctual behaviour, in contrast to the intellectual process in man, it results as a mere response to the instincts and organic needs, a matter which occurs with animals as well as man. For example, a baby recognises through giving him an apple and stone repeatedly, that the apple can be eaten while the stone cannot. Likewise, the donkey recognises that barley is eatable but soil is not. This differentiation occurs not through thought or intellect, but through the response to the instincts and the organic needs, which are present in animals and man. Thought cannot be produced unless previous information is coupled with the transference of the sensed thing through the senses to the brain.

Accordingly, the mind, intellect, or comprehension can be defined as the transmission of a sensed object through the senses to the brain and the existence of previous information by which this reality is explained. Therefore, the Communist intellectual leadership wrongly understood the meaning of the mind and the thinking process. Since the Communist intellectual leadership is not built upon the mind it is both a false and incorrect intellectual leadership.

The Capitalist intellectual leadership is built on a compromise agreed upon by the clergy and the intellectuals after their bloody conflict which lasted for many centuries. This compromised solution is the separation of religion from life i.e., the implicit acknowledgement of religion while separating it from life. Thus, the Capitalist intellectual leadership is not built on the mind, it is based on this compromise. Indeed, the idea of a compromise is deeply rooted in the Capitalists who draw the truth (haq) near to the falsehood (batil) and Iman near to Kufr the light (nur) near the dark (dhalam). The compromise on which they have built their doctrine and ideological leadership has made them swerve from the truth, the Iman and the light. Therefore, this ideological leadership is not built on the mind thus it is false.

 

However, the Islamic doctrine is built upon the mind, because it obliges the Muslim to believe in the existence of Allah (swt), in the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw) and the Qur‚an, through the use of the mind. It obliges the Muslim to believe in the ghaib, (things beyond the senses) on the condition that it is mentioned in a source which was conclusively proven rationally like the Qur‚an or hadith mutawatir. Thus, the Islamic creed is based upon the intellect.

This is from the rational perspective, however with regards to man‚s nature, the Islamic intellectual leadership agrees with man‚s nature since it recognises the existence of deen, its relevance upon life, and the obligation to manage the life according to the commands of Allah (swt).

Religiosity is innate in man since it is one of man‚s instincts with its own reaction, namely, sanctification. Which is a natural response to a specific instinct which differs from all the other responses of other instincts. Thus, the belief in deen and the obligation to live according to the commands of Allah (swt) is instinctive. It agrees with man‚s nature and therefore responds positively to man.

This differs from the Communist and the Capitalistic leaderships which disagree with man‚s nature. The Communist intellectual leadership denies the existence of religion absolutely and opposes its recognition. Accordingly, it contradicts man‚s nature. The Capitalist intellectual leadership neither recognises nor denies religion. It does not make the recognition or denial of religion an issue for discussion. However, it insist on the separation of religion from life and advocates that life be managed in a beneficial way with no relation to religion. Therefore, it contradicts man‚s nature.

The Islamic intellectual leadership therefore, is the only correct intellectual leadership because it agrees with man‚s nature and mind; all the other doctrines are false. Accordingly, the Islamic creed is the only correct and successful ideological leadership.

One question remains: Did the Muslims implement Islam? or did they only embrace its doctrine while implementing other systems and laws? The answer to this question is that Muslims implemented only Islam through all the ages from the arrival of the Messenger (saw) to Madinah until 1336 A.H, i.e., 1924 AD when the Islamic State collapsed at the hands of colonialism. The Muslims implementation of Islam was comprehensive and its success in its comprehensive implementation was overwhelming.

The practical implementation of Islam is undertaken by two entities having the responsibility to implement the system. They are:

The judge who is responsible for settling disputes between people, and, the ruler, who governs the people. It has been narrated through successive reports that the judges who settled the disputes between people from the time of the Messenger (saw) till the demise of the Khilafah in Istanbul, settled the disputes in all affairs with the laws of the Shariőah. This is whether the disputes were between Muslims or between Muslims and non-Muslims. The courts that settled disputes, such as infringement of rights, family matters, criminal prosecution, etc. were under one single court based on the Islamic Shariőah.

 

The clearest proof of this is contained in the records of the Shariőah courts stored in the old cities of Jerusalem, Baghdad, Damascus, Cairo, and Istanbul etc. These records are a conclusive proof that only the Shariőah was implemented by the judges. Even non-Muslims used to study and write Islamic fiqh like Saleem al-Baz, who wrote a commentary on al-Majalla. Laws that were introduced towards the demise of the state, were introduced on the basis of the scholars fatwa that such laws which do not contradict the Ahkam Shariőah. Consequently, the őUthmani penal code was introduced for application in 1275 A.H (1857 AD.) and the Law of Rights and Trade was introduced in 1276 A.H (1858 AD.). This was followed in 1288 A.H (1870 AD.) by the separation of the courts into two: Shariőah courts and regular law courts and a decree was passed to arrange for this separation.

In 1295 A.H (1877 AD.) a law was issued to regulate statuary courts. In 1296 A.H (1878 AD.) the Rights and Penalties Procedure was issued.

Since the őulemah did not find any justification to use the civil law, which was put aside in 1286 A.H (1868 AD.) and the Shariőah magazine (al-Majalla) issued a canon for transactions.

All these canons were issued as rules permitted by Islam and were not enacted except, as clearly spelled out in the decrees introducing the canons, after being permitted by the Sheikh al-Islam. The colonialist authorities since 1918 AD. have occupied some Islamic lands and were settling disputes over the civil cases according to non-Islamic laws. Whereas, those countries which were not physically occupied by colonialist armies, although still within their domain of influence, are still ruled judicially according to Islam, such as Afghanistan and the Arabian peninsula, i.e., Hijaz, Najd and Kuwait. These countries still run their judiciary according to the Islamic Shariőah, although the rulers in these countries no longer implement Islam. Accordingly, we observe that Islam was implemented judicially and no other law was applied in the judiciary throughout all the ages of the Islamic State.

The implementation of Islam by the ruler is represented in Ahkam Shariőah related to five areas: social; economics; education; foreign affairs; and ruling. The Ahkam Shariőah relating to these matter were all implemented by the state.

The social system defines the relationship between men and women and the matters that arise as a result of this relationship i.e. personal status. Alone the Shariőah is still applied in the social system in spite of the presence of the colonial powers in the Islamic lands and the presence of Kufr in the ruling system; definitely no other system has been implemented.

Concerning the economic system, it is characterised in two ways, firstly by the way in which the state collects public revenue in order to look after the people‚s affairs. Secondly, by the way in which this revenue is spent. As far as collecting revenue is concerned, the State collects the zakat due on fund, land and livestock as an obligation of worship and is exclusively distributed amongst the eight categories mentioned in the Qur‚an.

The State never used the zakat fund for managing its expenditures. The State collected the necessary funds for its expenditures according to the Shariőah. It did not apply any system of taxation, instead it implemented Islam. Thus, it collected kharaj over the productive worth of the land, jizya an amount to be paid by non-Muslim males, who are in a good condition of work, and customs duties in its capacity as the supervisor of internal and external trade.

The State did not collect funds except according to the Shariőah. As for distribution, the state had a nafaqah system (financial support) for the disabled, placed the safeeh (incompetent) and mubaddir (the one who spends his wealth on haram) under guardianship, and established lodgings in every city and along the roads to the pilgrimage to assist the poor, destitute, and the travellers, there relics can still be seen in major Muslim cities. The State‚s expenditure was solely governed by the Shariőah and by no other system. Any deficiency that may be noticed in this field was due to negligence and misapplication and not to the absence of the Shariőah.

The foundation of the educational policy was Islamic and the Islamic culture constituted the basis of the curriculum. Care was exercised to ensure that foreign culture was not adopted if it contradicted Islam. The neglect in opening schools towards the demise of the Ottoman state was typical of all the Muslim countries at that time, due to the intellectual decline which reached its lowest level in that period. In all the other ages of the Islamic State, it was well known that only the Islamic land attracted the attention of the scholars and students. The universities in Cordoba, Baghdad, Damascus, Alexandria and Cairo had a tremendous effect on the course of education throughout the world.

The foreign policy of the Islamic State was founded upon Islam. The Islamic State built its relationship with all other states upon the basis of Islam, and all other states dealt with it as an Islamic State. All of its external relationships were based on Islam and the interests of Muslims. It is known all over the world that the foreign policy of the Islamic State was an Islamic policy, to the extent that no evidence is required.

With regards to the ruling system, the structure of the state in Islam is established upon eight pillars:

the Khaleefah, i.e., the head of State

the Khaleefah‚s delegated assistants (Mo‚aawen Tafweed))

the Khaleefah‚s executive assistants (Mo‚aawen Tanfeed)

the Governors (Wula)

the Judges (Qadi)

the armed forces (Jaysh)

the administrative apparatus (Idarah)

the consultative assembly (Majlis al-Shura).

This structure existed and Muslims have never been ruled without a Khaleefah until, by the hands of Mustapha Kemal, the disbelieving (Kafir) colonial powers abolished the Khilafah in 1342 A.H (1924 AD.). The existence of a Khaleefah for the Muslims, prior to its removal, had been continuous. Whenever a Khaleefah died or was removed, he was succeeded by another, even during the era of decline.

Since the Islamic State is the Khaleefah, it means that when a Khaleefah is present the Islamic State exists. As for his assistants, they were present in all ages and were assistants and not wazir. Although, they were named wazir during the őAbbassid era. The assistants did not possess the characteristic of ministers found in the democratic system at all they were assistants and an executive body only, while all the powers were in the hands of the Khaleefah.

The existence of the governors, judges, and administrative system was obvious. And when the colonial powers came and occupied the land, all the affairs had been running and there were governors, judges and the administrative apparatus on the spot.

As for the Islamic army it was renowned all over the world for being unbeatable. With regards to the Majlis al-Shura, after the era of the Khulafah ar-Rashidun, its existence was not given much attention. The reason for that is that the Majlis al-Shura is not a basis for ruling but rather a part of the state‚s structure and is one of the rights of the people. Thus, if the Khaleefah neglects it he would be negligent, but the ruling system would still remain Islamic. The shura (consultation) in Islam entails expressing opinion which are contrary to the parliamentary system in democracy which is viewed as a branch of ruling. Therefore, it must be clear that the Islamic ruling system was applied.

A question may arise concerning the bayőah (pledge) to the Khaleefah. It is an established fact that there was no hereditary system in the Khilafah. In other words, unlike in monarchy, the leadership of the State could not be inherited. Instead, the leadership of the State would be acquired through receiving the bayőah from the Muslims in some eras, from the influential people (ahle al-halli wal-őaqd) in later eras or as what occurred towards the demise of the state from the Sheikh al-Islam. Throughout the ages of the Islamic State, the procedure was that no Khaleefah was appointed without receiving the bayőah. Never was a single incident reported that the Khaleefah was appointed through inheritance without receiving the bayőah. However, notwithstanding this, the manner of attaining bayőah was misapplied. Thus, a Khaleefah would take a bayőah from the people before his death for his son, brother, cousin, or any other individual of the family. After the death of the Khaleefah the bayőah was renewed for that person. This is a misapplication of the bayőah but it neither constitutes hereditary rule or succession to the throne. Likewise, the misapplication of the elections in a parliamentary or a democratic system is still called elections not an appointment even if the government backed candidates succeed in the elections.

Consequently, one must acknowledge that the Islamic system was applied throughout all periods of the Islamic State. As for the practical success of the Islamic ideology, it was without parallel particularly in the following two matters:

Firstly, the Islamic ideology transferred the Arabs from a low level of intellect in which they were acting haphazardly in the darkness of bloody family feuds and ignorance to an age of intellectual advancement glittering in the light of Islam whose sunrise was not restricted to the Arabs but prevailed all over the world. Muslims pursued in conveying Islam to the world, liberating in the process Persia, Iraq, the domain of al-Sham, (Syria, Lebanon and Palestine), Egypt and North Africa. These peoples had their own religion, nationalities, languages, customs and traditions. All were different from one another. The Persians differed from the Romans of Sham, from the Copts of Egypt and from the Berbers of North Africa, they lived under the rule of Islam, understood it, embraced it and became one nation (Ummah), the Islamic Ummah. The success of the Islamic ideology in melting these nationalities and people into one nation was therefore unparalleled. This is in spite of the fact that the ways of transportation was through camel and the means of communication was word of the mouth and the writing of the pen.

Al-Fath, however was to remove by force the physical obstacles to give the people free access towards what their minds and their innate readiness drive them to. In this manner people entered Islam in masses. On the other hand, the oppressive occupation of countries alienates the occupiers from the conquered. For example, the colonisation of the East by Western imperialism lasted for decades without gaining any result. If it was not for the influence of the deceptive Western culture and the oppression of its agents which will soon vanish, then the restoration of the Islamic ideology would be quicker than the blink of an eye.

Accordingly, the success of the Islamic ideology in forging all the various people into one Islamic Ummah is without parallel. These people have remained as Muslims even to this day, in spite of the ideological and material invasion by the colonial powers and their cunning ways of corrupting one‚s creed and thinking. These people will remain one Islamic nation (Ummah) till the Day of Judgement. It has never happened that any people (or ethnic group) which had embraced Islam have apostatised from it. As for the Muslims of Andalus (Spain), they were massacred by the Courts of Inquisition, the guillotine and burnt in ovens of the executioners. The Muslims of Bukhara, the Caucasus and Turkistan met with the same disastrous fate as those before them. The degree of success of the Islamic ideology and the application of Islam by the Islamic State can be ascertained by the evidence of all these people embracing Islam and becoming one Ummah with a determined awareness regarding her őaqeedah.

The second matter which denotes the success of this ideology is the fact that the Islamic Ummah was the leading nation in the world in respect to civilisation, material advancement, culture and science. For twelve centuries, dating from the seventh century AD. to the middle of the eighteenth century AD., the Islamic State remained as the leading and most powerful state in the world. Throughout this period it was the flower of this globe and the rising sun amongst the nations, a fact which confirms the success of this leadership and the success of Islam in implementing its system and őaqeedah upon the people. When the Islamic State and Ummah abandoned carrying its ideological leadership, falling short in understanding and applying Islam and neglected to convey the Islamic daőwah, it lapsed and declined among other nations. Therefore, we say that only the Islamic intellectual leadership is correct and it alone should be carried to the world. When the Islamic State, which carries this leadership, is established, the success of this leadership will be fulfilled today as it was before.

We have proven that Islam with its őaqeedah and the system which emanates from it agrees with man‚s nature. Consequently, Islam does not view man as a mechanical being functioning accurately like a machine and implementing the system without disparity on the basis of fine mathematical measures. On the contrary, from the Islamic perspective man is a social being applying the system with varying capabilities and qualities.

 

Thus, it is natural for Islam, on the one hand, to narrow the gap between people without making everyone equal while guaranteeing tranquillity for all. On the other hand, it is also natural that some individuals are found who deviate from the system and thus don‚t comply with it and others who do not respond or who turn away from the system. Inevitably, there will be in the society evildoers (fussaq), people who indulge in vices (fujjar), unbelievers (kuffar), hypocrites (munafiqeen), apostates (murtadun), and atheists (mulhidun). The important thing is that the society as a whole, from the point of view of its thoughts, sentiments, systems (rules and regulations) and people, is considered as an Islamic society which applies Islam when these elements manifest themselves as Islamic. The evidence for this is that it is impossible for anyone to apply a system at the level of Muhammad‚s (saw) application. In spite of this, at his (saw)‚s time there were disbelievers, hypocrites, apostates, atheists, evildoers and people who indulged in vices. Therefore, no one can claim that Islam was not applied completely or that the society was non-Islamic. Yet the Islamic application is on man as a social being, not a mechanical being.

Islam continued to be applied on the entire Islamic nation, Arabs and non-Arabs, from the time the Prophet (saw) settled down in Madinah till the colonial powers occupied the Islamic lands and replaced Islam with the Capitalist system. Islam was practically implemented from the first year of the hijrah until 1336 A.H (1918 AD) and the Islamic nation did not apply any other system than Islam throughout this period.

Although the Muslims translated books of philosophy, science, and different foreign cultures into Arabic, they never translated any legislation, system, or canon of other nations for research or its application. Considering Islam to be a system, some people applied it well and others misapplied it; this depended on whether they were observant or not in their comprehension of Islam or whether they were negligent in carrying its intellectual leadership. Consequently, the misapplication of Islam in some ages brought about decline in the Islamic society, but this is something which no system can avoid, because the application of the system depends on man. However, the mis-application does not mean that Islam was not implemented. Surely Islam was implemented and no other systems or ideology was applied.

The crucial point is in the enactment of canons and systems applied by the state. In this respect the state did not adopt any canon or system alien to Islam. What occurred was the misapplication of some of its rules by the rulers. However, notwithstanding this, one must observe two points when surveying the implementation of Islam throughout its history.

The first point is that history must not be taken from the enemies of Islam who harbour hatred towards it. Instead history must be taken from Muslims themselves after an extensive research so as not to adopt a distorted image. The second point is that the generalisation in study of the society should not be taken from the history of individuals or from one aspect of the society. For example, it would be wrong to judge the history of Ummayad era by studying the history of Yazid‚s era. Or to judge the history of the Abbassid era from some incidents of their Khulafa‚a.

Likewise, we must not judge the society of the Abbassid era from Kitab al-A‚Ghani (songs) which was written to narrate the stories of recklessly extravagant people, poets and authors and start thinking that the entire society was in a state of extravagance, sin, asceticism and isolation. Nor can we judge the Abbasid era from reading the books of mystics and conclude that the society was one asceticism.

Rather, we have to study the society comprehensively without any generalisation. We have to acknowledge that the history of the Islamic society as a society in any era was never written. What has been written is the affairs of the rulers and some officials. Those who wrote this history were not trustworthy, they were either slanderers or adulators and none of them deserves any credibility.

When the Islamic society is studied on this basis, i.e. to study it from all its sides comprehensively it can be found to be the best society. Since, it was so for the first, second and third centuries, in fact, right up to the middle of the twelfth century hijrah.

One finds that the society applied Islam throughout all its ages right up to the end of the Ottoman State as an Islamic state. Notwithstanding this, history should not be taken as the source for studying the system and fiqh. Additionally, the system should be taken from the sources of jurisprudence and not history, since history is not its source. Accordingly, when one wishes to understand the Communist system, one does not draw conclusions from the history of Russia, but from the books of the Communist ideology itself. Likewise, if one wishes to understand the books of English jurisprudence one should not take one‚s understanding from the history of England, but rather from the books of English jurisprudence. This applies to any system or canon. Islam is an ideology with its own őaqeedah and system. Consequently, those who wish to understand it must not use its history as a source, neither for knowledge nor for deducing rules, i.e., ahkam.

The study of Islam is taken from the books of Islamic Fiqh, and the source for deducing its laws is its from its Shariőah sources. Thus, history is not the correct source of the Islamic system, neither for its study nor as a Shariőah source. It is therefore incorrect to take the history of őUmar bin al-Khattab or őUmar bin őAbdul-Aziz or Haroun al-Rasheed, whether from the historical events ascribed to them or from the books written during their respective periods, as a source for the ahkam Shariőah. If an opinion of őUmar is followed in a question, it is followed in its capacity as a hukm Shariői deduced and applied by őUmar, as is the case with the hukm Shariői deduced by Abu Hanifah, Shafiői, Jaőfar and others. It is not adopted as an historical event. History, accordingly, has nothing to do with adopting or knowing the system or with ascertaining whether or not the system was applied. Fiqh, rather than history, is the means of establishing whether the system was applied because every period has its own problems which were tackled by a system or not because history only narrates events. In order to ascertain the system used to solve problems one must refer to the fiqh. When reference is made to the Islamic Fiqh, one neither finds in it any system taken by the Muslims from others, nor any system chosen by the Muslims from themselves. Instead, one finds it completely comprising of ahkam Shariőah deduced from the Shariőah evidences. Muslims were very careful to stop any impurities from creeping into the jurisprudence through deficient opinions, i.e., through deficient ijtihad. They even prohibited others from enacting the deficient (daif) opinion even if it was ascribed to a mujtahid mutlaq (absolute mujtahid).

As a result, there is not one legislative text other than the Islamic Fiqh throughout the Islamic world. Only one body of jurisprudence in a nation, without any other accompanying text, signifies that the nation did not use any other text in its legislation. If it were permitted to give attention to history, this would be confined to examining the way of applying the system. Sometimes, history contains political events from which the application of the system can be seen. Even this should not be taken except after a thorough research undertaken by Muslims.

History has three sources: History books, archaeological objects, and narration. Historical books should not be considered as a source because they are influenced by the political conditions of the time. They are filled with lies, either supporting the rulers and other people of their era or attacking those of the past. A recent example of this is the history of the Allawide family in Egypt. Prior to 1952 it had a bright picture in history books, but after 1952 its image was dark. The same applies to the history of other political events now and in the past. For this reason, history books should not be considered as a source for history, even if they were biographies written by their people.

Archaeological objects (excavation, and antiquities) would provide historical facts if studied honestly. Although they by themselves do not provide a historical timeline, they however denote occurrence of some events. If one observes the Islamic antiquities found in their countries, be they buildings, instruments, or any other thing, one can conclude that nothing was present in the Islamic world except Islam, the system, and rules of Islam. Additionally, the Muslims way of life and actions conducted were Islamic.

As for the third source narration, it is a correct source which can be relied on if the narration was correct and the method followed in collecting the narration was the same as the method followed in collecting the ahadith.

This is the manner in which history should be recorded. The Muslims followed this method of narration when they commenced writing. The classical books of history, such as al-Tabari‚s History, Ibn Hisham‚s Sirah, etc. were written according to this method. Muslims should not teach their children from the books of history written that use books of history as their source. An overview of the application of the Islamic system should not be taken from those books of history either. In conclusion, it is evident that Islam alone was implemented and nothing else was applied throughout all the periods.

However, since the end of the First World War which ended with the Allies victory culminating with the announcement of Lord Allenby, the commander of the campaign when occupying Jerusalem (al-Quds) in which he stated: "Now the Crusades are over". The Kafir colonialists have applied upon us the Capitalist system in all our daily life matters, to perpetuate the victory they achieved over us. We must therefore get rid of this rotten and corrupted system by which the colonialists grasp our countries. We have to completely uproot it, once and for all, so that we can resume the Islamic way of life.

It is a low superficial thinking to replace our system by any system and it is a shallow thinking to consider that if the nation applied the system without its őaqeedah it would save her. The Ummah must embrace the őaqeedah first and then apply the system emanating from the doctrine. The implementation of the system and embracing of the doctrine will constitute its salvation. This applies to the Ummah which is built upon this ideology and the state which is established on this basis.

As for the other people and nations, it is not necessary that they adopt the ideology as a prerequisite for applying the ideology upon them. The nation which embraces the ideology and conveys it to others can apply it on any people or nation, even if they do not believe in it. Since, the ideology will result in the revival of that nation or people and will attract them to believe in it. Thus embracing the ideology is not a condition for those on which it is applied it is rather an essential condition for those implementing it.

It is dangerous to adopt nationalism in conjunction with Socialism. Socialism cannot be separated from its materialist doctrine, because it will not be productive or influential. Neither can Socialism be adopted together with its doctrine, since it is a negative thought which contradicts man‚s nature. Furthermore, its adoption would mean that the Islamic nation would have to abandon the Islamic őaqeedah. We cannot adopt Socialism and simultaneously retain the spiritual aspect of Islam. This would result in neither Islam nor Socialism being adopted, by virtue of the fact that they contradict each other and whatever was adopted would be incomplete. Similarly, we cannot adopt the system of Islam devoid of its őaqeedah from which its system emanates as this means the adoption of the system devoid of spirit. Instead, we must adopt Islam wholly with its doctrine and systems and convey its intellectual leadership when we carry the daőwah for it.

Accordingly, there is only one way to attain our revival which is the resumption of the Islamic way of life and there is no way to resume the Islamic way of life except through establishing the Islamic State. This cannot be achieved unless we totally adopt Islam both as an őaqeedah, which solves the greatest problem and upon which man‚s view point in life is determined and the system which emanates from this doctrine.

The basis for this system is the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger. Its cultural treasures are the: fiqh, hadith, tafseer, Arabic language and others. No method can achieve this except by carrying the intellectual leadership for the Islamic da‚wah and completely implementing Islam in all fields. Once the intellectual leadership has been transmitted to the nation as a whole and to the Islamic State, we embark upon carrying the intellectual leadership to the world. This is the only way to achieve the revival: to convey the Islamic intellectual leadership to Muslims so as to resume the Islamic way of life and to deliver it to all of mankind by means of the Islamic State thereafter.


The Way to Carry the Islamic Daőwah

The Muslims did not lag behind the world due to their adherence to Islam. On the contrary, their regression commenced the day they abandoned this adherence to Islam and they allowed the foreign culture to enter their lands and the Western concepts to influence their minds. They abandoned the intellectual leadership of Islam when they neglected its daőwah and misapplied its laws (ahkam). Therefore, the Muslims must resume the Islamic way of life if they want the revival (nahdah) to occur. However, they will not be able to resume the Islamic way of life unless they carry the Islamic daőwah by carrying the intellectual leadership of Islam. The daőwah should be directed towards establishing the Islamic State which, in turn, will establish the leadership of Islam by carrying the Islamic ideology.

It should be noted that carrying the intellectual leadership by carrying the Islamic daőwah in order to revive the Muslims is performed because only Islam comprehensively and positively addresses the world. True revival cannot be achieved by the Muslims or others without Islam. It is on this basis that the daőwah should be carried out.

The daőwah must be carried to the world as an intellectual leadership from which all systems emanate. It is upon this leadership that all thoughts are built and from such thoughts spring forth the concepts that influence ones viewpoint in life without exception.

The daőwah should be carried today as it was delivered in the past and should proceed in compliance with the example of the Messenger (saw), without the slightest deviation from its method in its general and specific details. No regard should be given to the differences in time, for these differences amount to nothing more than the means and forms. However, the essence and the reality of life, has not and will not change regardless of the passing of ages and changing of peoples and places.

Carrying the daőwah demands frankness, courage, strength, thought and to challenge all that contradicts the fikra and tariqa (idea and method) of Islam by facing it and exposing its falsehood irrespective of the situation and its consequences.

Carrying the Islamic daőwah necessitates that Islam alone should be recognised as possessing ultimate sovereignty, regardless of whether the masses agree or disagree or whether they accept it or deny it, or whether it is in accordance with the peoples customs or not.

The daőwah carrier does not flatter the people, is not courteous to the authorities or cares for the peoples‚ customs and traditions, and does not give any attention to whether the people will accept him or not. Rather he must adhere to the ideology alone and solely express it and no regard is given to anything except the ideology. It is not allowed to tell the followers of other ideologies to adhere to their ideologies. Instead, they are invited without compulsion to embrace the ideology (of Islam) because the daőwah requires that there be no other ideology straddling alongside Islam and that the sovereignty be for Islam alone.

"It is He who has sent His Messenger with the Guidance and deen of Haqq, to prevail over all other religions even though the idolaters may abhor it." [TMQ 9:33]

The Messenger (saw) came to this world with the Message and openly challenged the whole world. He (saw) believed in the Truth he (saw) was inviting the people to and declared an ideological war against the őred and black‚, i.e., everyone, irrespective of their traditions, customs, religions, doctrines, rulers and masses.

He (saw) paid no credence to anything other than the message of Islam. He commenced the daőwah by discrediting the false deities of Quraysh. He (saw) challenged them in their doctrines, discredited them while alone and isolated and with no helper and no weapon except his unshakeable and deeply rooted conviction in Islam to which he was inviting. He (saw) did not care for the Arab customs, traditions, religions, or doctrines. In this respect, he (saw) was not courteous nor gave them any regard.

Similarly, the daőwah carrier has to challenge everything. This includes challenging the customs, traditions, erroneous thoughts and concepts, the public opinion when it is wrong even if he has to struggle against it, and the doctrines and religions. This is despite the fact the that the daőwah carrier might be exposed to the fanaticism of their followers and the hostility of those who stick to their distortions.

Delivering the daőwah requires a concern for the complete implementation of Islam without the slightest deviation. The carrier does not accept any truce nor concession, negligence nor postponement. Instead, he maintains the matter as a whole and definitively settles it without accepting any intercession which would obstruct the truth.

The Messenger of Allah (saw) did not accept the request of Thaqif‚s delegation to be allowed to retain their idol, Allat, for three years before it was demolished, neither did he (saw) exempt them from prayer as pre-conditions for embracing Islam. He (saw) refused to leave Allat for two years or for one month as they had demanded. He (saw) refused this request firmly, and decisively, without any hesitation or leniency. This is simply because man has to either believe or not, after all, the result is either Paradise or Hell. However, the Messenger of Allah (saw) did accept their request not to have them demolish their idol through their hands. Instead, he asked Abu Sufyan and al-Mughira ibn Shu‚bah to demolish it. He definitely did not accept anything less than the complete őaqeedah and the required implementation. As for the means and forms of carrying this implementation, the Messenger of Allah (saw) accepted them because they are not connected with the tenets of the Islamic őaqeedah. Therefore, care must be taken in delivering the daőwah to preserve the completeness of its thought and implementation without any compromise in the fikra and tariqa. There is no harm in using any usloob (means) it demands.

Carrying the Islamic daőwah necessitates that every one of its actions should be undertaken for a specific objective. The carrier should always be aware of this aim and work towards achieving it, exerting himself relentlessly to fulfil it. Therefore, the carrier would not be satisfied by thought without action and would deem it to be a hypnotic and fanciful philosophy. Likewise, he would not be satisfied by thought and action devoid of any objective, considering this to be a spiral motion which ultimately ends in apathy, no real accomplishment, and despair. Instead, the daőwah carrier has to insist upon connecting the thought with action and uniting the two in working for a specific objective which will be fulfilled in a practical manner and be brought into existence.

The Messenger of Allah (saw) carried the intellectual leadership of Islam in Makkah. When he realised that the society there would not make Islam its system, he (saw) began preparing the society of Madinah. In Madinah, he established the State, thereby implementing Islam, carried its message, and prepared the Ummah to convey it after him and to proceed in the same way he had traced. Therefore, carrying the Islamic daőwah in the situation where there is no Khaleefah, should include the call for Islam and the resumption of the Islamic way of life by establishing the Islamic State which implements Islam and carries its message to the world. Thus, the daőwah is transferred from a call within the nation to resume and Islamic life to a call to the world carried out by the Islamic State and from a local daőwah within the Islamic world to a universal daőwah.

The call to Islam should clearly include correcting the prevalent doctrines, strengthening the relationship with Allah (swt) and providing solutions for the problems of the people, so that the daőwah remains vivid in all fields of life. The Prophet (saw) would recite to the people of Makkah the following verses:

"Perish the hands of Abu Lahab." [TMQ 111:1]

"This is verily the word of an honourable messenger. It is not the words of a poet. Little it is that you believe." [TMQ 69:40-41]

"Woe to those who deal in fraud, those who when they have to receive by measure from men, exact full measure, but when they have to give by measure or weight to men, give less than due." [TMQ 83:1-3]

"For those who believe and do righteous deeds will be gardens beneath which rivers flow; that is the great salvation (the fulfilment of all desires)." [TMQ 85:11]

In Madinah, he recited:

"Establish prayer and practice regular charity." [TMQ 2:110]

The way he (saw) recited:

"Go forth (whether equipped) lightly or heavily, and strive and struggle with your property and yourselves in the cause of Allah." [TMQ 9:41]

And he (saw) would recite:

"O you who believe, when you deal with each other in transactions involving future obligations for a fixed period of time, reduce them to writing." [TMQ 2:282]

"In order that it does not become (merely) a circuit between the wealthy among you." [TMQ 59:7]

"Not equal are the Companions of the Fire and the Companions of the Garden. The Companions of the Garden are the victorious." [TMQ 59:20]

Accordingly, the Islamic daőwah should carry to the people the system by which they are to solve their daily life‚s problems. The secret to the success of the Islamic daőwah is that it is vivid and addresses man in a comprehensive manner as a human being, thereby bringing about a comprehensive and radical change in him.

It is impossible for the daőwah carriers to carry the responsibility and to effectively discharge their duties unless the motivation towards perfection and completeness is rooted within themselves. They should constantly search for the truth, continuously scrutinising all that they know in order to purify their understandings of issues from any alien thoughts, and protect themselves from any alien idea that may penetrate. This will keep the idea carried and conveyed pure and clear. The purity and clarity of the thoughts is the only guarantee for Islam‚s success and for its continuity.

The daőwah carriers have to carry this duty as an obligation from Allah (swt), enthusiastically and happily embarking upon it and expecting the pleasure of Allah (swt). They must not look for any worldly reward or expect praises from people. They must acknowledge nothing except the pursuit of the pleasure of Allah(swt).


The Islamic Civilisation

There is a difference between the hadharah (civilisation) and the madaniyah (material aspect of culture). The hadharah constitutes the whole concepts about life whereas the madaniyah means the material forms of sensed objects used in daily life affairs. The hadharah is based on a particular point of view in life and therefore it is specific. The madaniyah can be of two kinds: specific or universal.
 

Objects such as statues are specific and thus are a product of a specific hadharah. Material aspects produced by science and its progress, industry and its evolution, are general and thus are not particular to a specific nation, rather they are universal.

This distinction between hadharah and madaniyah must always be recognised and maintained. One must also be aware of the forms resulting from hadharah and the madaniyah forms resulting from science and industry. Therefore, when adopting an object of madaniyah, a distinction between its forms and the differentiation from hadharah must be clear. There should be no objection in acquiring the Western madaniyah resulting from science, industry, etc. However, Western madaniyah resulting from the Western hadharah must not be adopted on any account because we are not allowed to adopt the Western hadharah for it contradicts the Islamic hadharah from the very basis upon which it is established, its point of view in life, and its understanding of the meaning of human happiness.

The Western hadharah is established upon the separation of religion from life and it denies religion from having any impact on any of life‚s affairs and hence it separated religion from the state. This result is natural for those who separate religion from life and deny its impact in life. It was on this basis that the life and the System of Life were built. Its hadharah views the entire life as the pursuit of benefit. Thus, its standard for action in life is the benefit. Therefore, benefit is the basis upon which the system is established and the hadharah is built. Benefit is the most prominent and apparent concept in its system and in the hadharah. Happiness in their view is constantly seeking and experiencing sensual gratification. It follows that the Western hadharah is established on the desire to reap benefits and gives no consideration or even recognition to anything except benefit, thus rendering it the measure of actions.

The spiritual side is restricted to the individual and is not part of the social order. The spiritual affair of man is confined to the church and clergy. Consequently, there are no moral, spiritual or humanitarian values in the Western hadharah, rather only materialistic ones. Owing to this, humanitarian actions became affiliated to organisations separated from the state, such as the Red Cross and the missionaries. Every value, apart from the chief materialistic value of benefit was excluded from life. The Western hadharah consists of such concepts about life.

As for the Islamic hadharah, it is established upon the basis contradicting the Western hadharah. Its view about life and meaning of happiness are different from the Western hadharah. The Islamic hadharah is built upon the belief in Allah and that He has established a system for man, life, and the universe. He (saw) sent Muhammad (saw) with Islam as the one and only Deen for mankind. This means that the Islamic hadharah is established on the Islamic őaqeedah, comprising the belief in Allah (swt), His (swt) Angels, His (swt) Books, His (swt) Messengers, the Hereafter, and al-Qadaa wal Qadar. Thus, the őaqeedah is the basis of the hadharah and consequently the hadharah is founded upon a spiritual basis.

Life in the Islamic hadharah is viewed from the outlook of Islam which emanates from the Islamic doctrine or őaqeedah. The way of life and actions are both established upon this őaqeedah. Viewing the mixing of matter and spirit as mans actions conducted by the ahkam Shariőah constitute the Islamic outlook on life.

While mans actions are material, his observation of the relationship with Allah (swt) when he undertakes the action as haram or halal constitutes the spirit (ruh). It means that the mixing of matter with spirit has taken place. Accordingly, the commands of Allah (swt) regulate the actions of a Muslim. The Muslims ultimate objective in carrying out his actions in accordance with the commands of Allah (swt) is the attainment of Allah‚s (swt) pleasure and not benefit.

However, the immediate end in undertaking the action is the sought after value, which differs according to the type of action. The value may be materialistic for the person who engages in commerce or trade to make a profit, the exerted labour constituting a material action. Simultaneously, the person is guided by his awareness of his relationship with Allah (swt) through the commands of Allah (swt), thus seeking the pleasure of Allah (swt).

The value may be spiritual, such as prayer, zakat, fasting or pilgrimage. The value may be moral or ethical, such as upholding the truth, being honest, or exhibiting loyalty. The value could be humanitarian, such as rescuing a drowning person or helping the poor.

These values are sought by man when he undertakes the action. These values should not be viewed as the driving force for mans action nor as the ultimate objective. They should be viewed only as the specific action which differs according to the type of action.

Happiness is attaining Allah‚s (swt) pleasure and not the fulfilment of mans needs. Satisfying all such needs: organic needs and instinctual desires, are an essential means to sustain oneself, but happiness is not guaranteed by their fulfilment. In summary, this is the Islamic view about life on the basis of which lies the outlook which is the Islamic hadharah.

It is obvious that the Islamic hadharah contradicts the Western hadharah in every sense. Objects falling under the madaniyah objects resulting from hadharah which is specific to the Islamic hadharah contradict the first type of madaniyah which is specific to the Western hadharah. For example, a photograph by itself is an object of madaniyah. The Western hadharah considers the photograph of a naked woman consistent about its view about women. Thus, an individual from the West views the photograph to be a piece of art which he could take pride in and a piece of art when it accomplishes artistic conditions. However, this object of madaniyah contradicts with the Islamic hadharah and the Islamic view about women which considers women as an honour that must be protected. Consequently, such photographs are to be prevented, because they provoke the sexual drive which triggers moral laxity in the society. Likewise, if a Muslim was to build a house, another object of madaniyah, he would have to take into consideration the women inside to not be exposed to those outside. Accordingly, the Muslim encloses the house with a wall and is sensitised to the positioning of windows, but the Western individual pays no attention to these attributes of a house because the hadharah he adopts.

This applies to all objects of civilisation produced by the Western hadharah, such as statues, clothing, etc. If clothing is part of the deen of the unbelievers, the Muslims are then forbidden to wear them because they carry a specific viewpoint on life. However, if the clothing is not part of the way of life of the unbelievers and are used for their practicality and utility, they are considered to be a universal object of madaniyah permissible for use by the Muslims.

Objects of madaniyah which are products of science and industry such as laboratory equipment, medical and industrial tools, furniture, carpet, etc. are all universal objects of madaniyah. The use of such objects which do not result from the hadharah are permissible.

A glance at the Western hadharah which casts its long dark shadows over the world reveals that it cannot guarantee tranquillity for man. On the contrary, the Western hadharah is the cause for man‚s deep rooted misery. This hadharah which adopts as its basis the separation of religion from life‚s affairs, thus giving no weight to the spiritual aspect in the social order, and it depicts life only as the fulfilment of desires and makes the attainment of benefit as the foundation for a relationship between men.

This inevitably will produce nothing but perpetual misery and anxiety. As long as benefit is the basis, conflict over it will naturally increase and the reliance on force to establish relationships between people will be natural. Thus, colonisation is natural to the followers of this hadharah and since benefit alone constitutes the basis of life, any semblance of ethics will be unstable. Hence, it is natural for any good ethics to be shunned in life in the same way that the spiritual values were neglected and life established upon competition, struggle, aggression and colonialism. The spiritual crisis in the people, perpetual anxiety and widespread evil all over the world today serve as glaring and oppressively clear indictments of this Western hadharah it results in. It has dominated the world and has led to such grave results and consequently have constituted a great danger to the normal functioning of humanity.

A survey of the Islamic hadharah which dominated the world from the seventh century CE until the end of the eighteenth century CE reveals that it had no colonialistic character. Indeed, colonialism is alien to Islam‚s nature, since it did not differentiate between the Muslims and other peoples in terms of meting out justice and securing rights for all people who submitted to it throughout its reign. It is a hadharah established upon a spiritual basis which fulfils all the values: materialistic, spiritual, moral, and humanitarian. The őaqeedah is given the utmost importance in life, which is depicted as being governed by the commands of Allah (swt). Islam views happiness solely as the attainment of Allah‚s (swt) pleasure. When this Islamic hadharah dominates again, as it did before, it will guarantee resolving the crisis confronting the world and the welfare of humanity.


The Islamic System

Islam is the deen revealed by Allah (swt) to Muhammad (saw) to organise the relationship of man with his Creator, with himself, and man with other human beings. Man‚s relationship with his Creator includes the őaqaid itself and the acts of worship. Man‚s relationship with himself includes the moral code, diet, and clothing. Man‚s relationship with other humans involves societal transactions and the penal code hence, Islam is an ideology addressing all life affairs. It is not a theology that simply prescribes a priesthood or is only bound to it. It does away with authocracy (the dichotomy of clergy) for there is not a group called the clergy and another group called cilular. All those who embrace Islam are considered Muslims and are equal in obligation and rights from the viewpoint of Islam. Hence there is no clergy and laical men, for its spiritual side means that all things are created by a Creator and organised by His order.

Such a profound view of the universe, man and life, and what surrounds them and what is related to them, necessarily shows that man is limited, dependent, and needy. This is evident in the universe, man, and life. This confirms that all these are created by a Creator, directed by His commands and that man, when he proceeds in this life, needs a system to organise the satisfaction and fulfilment of his instincts and organic needs. This system cannot emanate from man as he is limited and lacks comprehensive knowledge.

Furthermore, mans ability to set such a system is subject to differences, inconsistency, and contradiction. This will produce a system full of contradiction and will lead to mans misery. The system must, therefore, come from Allah (swt) and thus it is obligatory that man conducts his actions according to a system from Allah (swt). However, if man complied with the Islamic system based on the pursuit of the material benefit of this system and not because the system was from Allah (swt), it will be devoid of a spiritual side or aspect.

Therefore, man must organise his actions in life by the commands of Allah (swt) based upon his comprehension of the relationship with Allah (swt) so that the spirit would exist in mans action. Spirit is mans observation of his relationship with Allah (swt) and the mixing of matter with spirit is the comprehension of the relationship with Allah (swt) the moment that the action is performed. An action is őmatter‚, and the comprehension of the relationship with Allah when performing this action is őspirit‚ (ruh) and directing one‚s action according to the commands of Allah (swt) - due to the comprehension of this relationship - is mixing matter with ruh.

Accordingly, when a non-Muslim acts according to the ahkam Shariőah which are derived from the Qur‚an and Sunnah, his actions are not directed by spirit, and the mixing of matter and spirit does not exists in his actions. This due to the fact that he did not believe in Islam and did not comprehend the relationship with Allah (swt). He simply appreciated the system and thus organised his actions accordingly.

This is in contrast to a Muslim who undertakes his actions according to Allah‚s (swt) commands based upon his belief in Allah (swt) and comprehension of the relationship with Allah (swt) and whose goal in complying with the commands of Allah (swt) is attaining Allah‚s (swt) pleasure and not just the benefit the system provides. Therefore, it is necessary that the spiritual aspects exists in things and the ruh is apparent when undertaking actions. It must be clear for all that the spiritual aspect constitutes the thing being created by a Creator i.e. the relationship of the created with the Creator, while the spirit is the observation of this relationship, i.e. the comprehension of this relationship by man. This is the correct concept (about the spiritual aspect and spirit) in this regard and all other concepts are false. It is the profound and illuminated view of the universe, man, and life which has led to the correct results and to this correct concept.

Some religions have maintained that the universe has two aspects, the material and transcendental and man embodies both spiritual ascension and physical yearning, matter and soul and that by extension, life includes both the materialistic and spiritual aspects. They assume that the material contradicts the transcendental, and the spiritual ascension contradicts the physical yearning and matter is separate from the spirit. They contend that these two sides are separated from one another due to their fundamental contradiction in nature. Thus, they cannot be mixed and the increase in one leads to a deficit in the other.

Consequently, those who desire the őHereafter‚ have to excel in the spiritual dimension. Based on this understanding, two authorities have arisen in Christianity, the spiritual and the temporal: őRender unto Caesar what is Caesar‚s and unto God what is God‚s.‚ The people yielding spiritual authority into their hands, the clergy and priests, endeavoured to acquire temporal authority. As a result, a severe conflict arose between the temporal and the spiritual authorities culminating with the church being confined to the spiritual authority and was prevented from interfering in temporal matters. Religion, which was regarded as clerical was then separated from life.

This separation between religion and life is the doctrine of the Capitalist ideology. It is the basis of Western hadharah and the intellectual leadership which the Western colonialism calls for and subsequently conveys to the world. It is the fundamental layer of its culture which is used to shake the Muslims‚ belief in Islam. It puts Christianity as a standard for Islam through analogy. Thus, anyone who carries this notion, őthe separation of religion from life‚ is an indirect or direct agent directed by the Western intellectual leadership. He works intentionally or ignorantly as an agent of Western colonialism. He is either ignorant of the Islamic ideology or its enemy.

Islam views that objects comprehended by our senses are őmatter‚ and their being created by a Creator determines the spiritual side in them. The ruh is man‚s comprehension of his relationship with Allah (swt). Thus, there does not exist a spiritual aspect separated from the materialistic aspect, and also there is no spiritual ascension and physical desires in man. Rather, he has organic needs and instincts which need to be satisfied.

One of the instincts in man is the instinct of sanctification which means the need for the Creator, the Organiser, which is an offspring of the natural inability of man. The satisfaction of the instincts cannot be labelled as the materialistic aspect or the spiritual aspect. Rather, it should be viewed only as a fulfilment. If man satisfied this organic needs and instincts in accordance with the system revealed from Allah (swt) and in accordance with his relationship with Allah (swt), this satisfaction would be directed by the spirit. If the satisfaction was not based on a system or a system not revealed by Allah (swt), then the satisfaction will be purely materialistic and will lead to man‚s misery.

If the instinct of reproduction was satisfied without a system or with a system not from Allah it would lead to misery. Whereas, if it were satisfied through the system of marriage, which is revealed by Allah (swt) according to the ahkam of Islam, it would be a marriage resulting in tranquillity.

If the instinct of religiosity was satisfied without a system or a system not from Allah (swt), by worshipping other human beings or idols, it would be polytheism (shirk) and disbelief (kufr). If it were to be satisfied with the ahkam of Islam, it would be ibadah (worship). It is therefore necessary to observe the spiritual aspect in all things and to realise all actions by following Allah‚s (swt) command i.e. on the basis of comprehension of his relationship with Allah (swt). In this case, the actions will be directed by the spirit. Therefore, one cannot embody two things (spiritual or temporal). The fact is that there is only one things which is the action. Describing the action as purely material or directed by (ruh) does not derive from the action as such but from either being directed according to the rules (ahkam) of Islam or not.

For example, when a Muslim kills his enemy in the battlefield his action is considered a Jihad for which he will be rewarded, since it is directed by the ahkam of Islam. When the same person kills an innocent person, Muslim or otherwise, his action is considered a murder for which he will be punished, because it is not directed by Allah‚s (swt) command. Both actions are the same and stem from man in that they constitute the taking of a life, but the killing would be worship when it is directed by the spirit and murder when it is not. A Muslim is obligated to direct his actions according to the spirit and the mixing of matter with spirit. It is not permissible to separate matter from spirit or separate any action from Allah (swt)‚s order on the basis of comprehending the relationship with Allah.

Accordingly, everything that implies the separation of the spiritual aspect from the material aspect should be done away with. Thus, there is no clergy in Islam, no spiritual authority and no temporal authority which is separated from religion. Rather, Islam is a deen of which the State is an integral part. The State is a group of the ahkam Shariőah in the same manner that the prayer is. It is the method to implement the rules of Islam and to carry the Islamic daőwah.

Therefore, anything that confines religion to the spiritual dimension, separating it from politics and ruling should be abolished. All institutions established to exclusively oversee the spiritual aspect have to be shut down. Therefore, the department of mosques has to be dissolved and should be managed by the department of education. The Shariőah courts and the statutory courts must also be dissolved making the court system one and based upon Islam. After all, the authority of Islam is one.

Islam is an őaqeedah and system. The creed is the belief in Allah (swt), His (swt) Angels, His (swt) Books, His (swt) Messengers, the Day of Judgement, and al-Qada‚a wal Qadar, the good and the bad are from Allah (swt). Islam builds the őaqeedah which the mind can comprehend on the intellect. This includes the existence of Allah (swt), the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw) and the Qur‚an. In the aspects of the creed which are beyond the senses (ghayb) such as the Day of Judgement, Angels, Paradise, and Hell, these are all based upon and proved by conclusive textual evidences (daleel naqli), which are themselves built upon rational proofs. Islam has made the intellect the foundation for orders.

The systems are ahkam Shariőah. which organise man‚s affairs. The Islamic system handles all of man‚s affairs and outlined a comprehensive set of rules enabling one to derive detailed rules from these comprehensive meanings when carrying out the implementations. The Qur‚an and Sunnah also includes general outlines i.e. general hints to deal with man‚s problems in his capacity as a human being and enabling the mujtahideen to deduce partial judgements from the general hints for problems that occur throughout the ages and in different places.

Islam has one consistent approach in solving problems. It invites the mujtahid to thoroughly study the issue till he understands it and then to study the relevant Shariőah texts and finally deduce the solution for the issue from the texts. The mujtahid deduces the hukm Shariői for this question from the legal evidences of Islam and shouldn‚t use any other method. Any issue facing man should be comprehensively studied as an integrated human problem. It should not be studied partially as an economic, social, political or any other type of question. It should be studied as a human question requiring hukm Shariői in order to know the hukm of Allah (swt) related to it.


Hukm Shariői

Hukm Shariői is őthe address of the Legislator related to the actions of people‚. It is either conclusively proven (qata‚ee dhuboot), such as the Qur‚an and hadith mutawatir or inconclusively proven (dhanniy dhuboot) such as the non-mutawatir hadith.

If it‚s qata‚ee dhuboot and its meaning is definitive (qata‚ee dalalah), the hukm will be conclusive. An example of this is the number of all prescribed rakah in salat, since they are mentioned in the hadith mutawatir. Likewise, the prohibition of riba, the amputation of the hand of the thief, and the lashing of the zani are conclusive rules whose correctness is definite allowing no room for disagreement and where there is only one single conclusively proven opinion.

If the address of the Legislator is qata‚ee dhuboot and does not yield a definite meaning (dhanniy dalalah), then the included hukm is inconclusive. For example, the ayah relative to jizyah in the Qur‚an.

The ayah is qata‚ee dhuboot but the meaning is not definite. The Hanafi school insisted it to be called jizyah and those who are required to pay it must be in a state of humiliation when rendering payment. However, the Shafiői school did not insist on calling it jizyah and permitted jizyah to be called double zakat. Therefore, they did not require for the one paying it to be humiliated and their subduing to the Islamic rules was considered sufficient.

If the address of the Legislator is dhanniy dhuboot, such as the non-mutawatir hadith, then the hukm included will not be conclusive, regardless of whether the meaning is qata‚ee dalalah or not. For example, fasting six days in Shawwal or the prohibition of leasing agricultural land, both of which are proven through Sunnah.

The hukm Shariői is understood from the address of the Legislator (Khitab Asharic) through a correct ijtihad. Thus, the ijtihad of a mujtahid produces the Hukm Shariői and accordingly, Allah (swt)‚s hukm for every mujtahid is the hukm that the mujtahid arrived at through his ijtihad and what he most likely thinks to be correct.

It has been agreed upon amongst scholars that if a mukallaf fulfils the capacity of ijtihad in a problem matter and makes ijtihad and reaches thereupon a hukm he is not allowed to follow other mujtahideen in this issue because it would be a taqleed in a matter which contradicts what is most likely correct in his opinion.

Moreover, he is not allowed to leave his opinion, except if the Khaleefah adopts a Hukm Shariői in which case he must implement the Khaleefah‚s adoption because the opinion he reached through his own ijtihad is Allah‚s hukm in the specific issue i.e. a Hukm Shariői. Whereas the order or decision of the Khaleefah cancels the disparity of opinions. However, if the qualified mujtahid did not perform ijtihad on an issue, then he is permitted to practise taqleed of opinion of other mujtahideen for the Ijmaő as-Sahabah confirms that a mujtahid is allowed to give up his ijtihad and follow other mujtahideen..

The person not qualified to make ijtihad is termed the muqallid (follower) and is of two kinds:

A. Muttabe‚a
B. őAmmi

The muttabe‚a is a person who has acquired some important knowledge in ijtihad and consequently follows the hukm after understanding its daleel. Accordingly, Allah‚s hukm for this muttabe‚a is the opinion of the mujtahid whom he follows.

The őammi does not possess some important knowledge in ijtihad and hence follows the mujtahid without having knowledge of the daleel for the hukm. This őammi has to follow the opinion of the mujtahideen and apply the ahkam they have deduced and the Hukm Shariői related to him is the one deduced by the mujtahid whom he follows. Therefore, the Hukm Shariői is the hukm deduced by the mujtahid who is qualified to practise ijtihad. It is Allah‚s hukm for him, and he is not allowed to leave it to follow another opinion. It is also Allah‚s hukm for those who follow the mujtahid and they are not permitted to leave it.

If the muqallid follows a mujtahid in a hukm of any issue and acts accordingly, he is not allowed to leave that hukm for another mujtahid at all. However, it is permissible for the muqallid to follow the mujtahid in other issues, because Ijmaő as-Sahabah permitted that a muqallid may ask the opinion of a different Šleem on a different issue.

If the muqallid subscribed to a certain School of Thought (madhab), such as the Shafiői and committed himself to follow the entire madhab, then the following applies upon him.

The muqallid is not allowed to follow any other mujtahid on an issue he has already practised according to the madhab he is following. Regarding the issues that he has not practised yet, he is allowed to follow the other mujtahideen.

However, if a mujtahid reached a hukm on an issue through his ijtihad he is allowed to abandon the result of his ijtihad and follow another opinion, if it means the unification of all Muslims on one opinion, as happened at his baőyah when őUthman acted accordingly.
 


The Types of Ahkam Shariőah
 

The Ahkam Shariőah is divided into:

The Fard (compulsory)
The Haram (prohibited)
The Mandoub (recommended)
The Makruh (undesirable)
The Mubah (permissible).

The Hukm Shari‚ is either an order to perform an action or to abstain from performing the action. If the order (őamr) to perform the action is decisive (jazim), then it is classified as fard or wajib. Both these terms are synonymous. If the őamr to do an action is indecisive, it is classified as Mandoub. If the order to abstain is decisive, it is classified as haram or mahzur which are synonymous whereas if the order to abstain is indecisive (ghair jazim), it is classified as Makruh.

Thus, with the fard/wajib, the performer is praised and the one who abstains from it is condemned. The person who neglects to perform the fard deserves to be punished. The person who performs the haram is condemned and the one who abstains from it is praised. The person who performs the haram deserves to be punished. The person who performs the mandoub is praised and rewarded and the one who abstains is not condemned i.e. he is rewarded for performing the action and not punished for abstaining from it. The person who does not perform the makruh action is praised and rewarded i.e. abstaining from the makruh is preferable. The mubah is which the daleel as-Sami shows that the address of the Legislator implies to choose between performing an action or abstaining from it.
 


Sunnah

Linguistically the Sunnah means the method. However, in terms of the Shariőah it either means a nafilah that has been narrated about the Prophet (saw - peace be upon him and his family) such as the recommended rakaat (rakaat as-Sunnah) which are distinct from fard (compulsory). It should not be understood that the action is called Sunnah because it is from the Prophet (saw) and that the fard is from Allah (swt). The Sunnah and the fard are both from Allah (swt); and the Messenger is but a conveyor from Allah (swt) because the Messenger uttered not out of whims but only that which was revealed to him from Allah (wahy). Thus, although it is a Sunnah narrated about the Prophet (saw), nevertheless it is narrated as a recommended action, i.e., nafilah; in the same way that the fard has been narrated as a compulsory action. Hence, the two compulsory rakat of the dawn (fajr) prayer have been narrated about the Prophet (saw) through decisive reports, known as tawatur, as being fard; and the two recommended rakat of the fajr prayer have also been narrated through decisive reports (tawatur) as being Sunnah (nafilah); and both are from Allah (swt) and not from the Messenger himself. The command (őamr) is either fard or nafilah in actions of worship (ibadat) and fard or mandoub in other actions. In other words, nafilah is the same as mandoub, but it is specifically called nafilah (ibadat), and also described as Sunnah.

The Sunnah also means all the Shariőah evidences which came from the Messenger other the Qur‚an. This includes his speech, actions and consent (his silence upon actions performed before him).
 


Emulating the Actions of the Messenger (saw)

The actions performed by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) are of two kinds; the actions that are part of his human nature and other actions. Every action that is part of his nature, such as standing, sitting, drinking, and eating etc., are indisputably permitted (mubah) for both him and his Ummah. Consequently, they do not fall within the category of actions of the mandoub.

Those actions which are not part of his human nature are either of the actions that are proven to be specifically personal to him, i.e., they are not practised by anyone else, or they are not personal to him. Those actions which are proven to be specifically personal to the Prophet (saw), such as the permission for him to fast continually through the day and night, and to marry more than four wives, etc., are inimitable and it is haram for us to emulate him as it has been proven by Ijmaa‚ that are only specific to him and thus we are not permitted to follow him in these.

Those actions known to be examples for us to follow are indisputable daleels. They are known by either a quite explicit statement, such as: őPray the same as you have seen me pray‚, and őEmulate me in all your rituals‚, The evidence here denotes that his action is an example for us to follow. Or by a circumstantial evidence, such as amputating the hand of a thief from the wrist bone as an exemplification for the Supreme‚s words őCut off their hands‚. It is contingent upon the evidence on whether the actions are compulsory (fard), recommended (mandoub) or permitted (mubah).

This explanation is his action either by speech or circumstantial evidences is linked to the evidence whether it implies a Woujoub, Nadb or Ibahah. As for those actions of the Prophet which are not accompanied either by a negation or affirmation from the Prophet (saw), that they are examples for us to follow, they either show the intention of Qurbah or not. If they show the intention Qurbah they become mandoub for which the performer is rewarded for performing it and the abstainer is not punished. An example of this kind is the Sunnah of Duha. However, if the intention of approaching Allah (swt) is not evident, they fall within the permissible actions (mubah).
 


Adopting Divine Rules (Ahkam Shariőah)

During the era of the Companions (Sahabah), the Muslims used to extract the Ahkam Shariőah from the Book and the Sunnah by themselves. The judges, when tackling the disputes among people, would deduce for themselves the hukm shari‚ for every issue or event that they were faced with. The rulers, starting with the Amir al-Mu‚mineen to the Woulat and others, would themselves deduce the Ahkam Shariőah to solve every problem that arose during their ruling. Abu-Musa al Ash‚ari and Shuraih (raa) were two such judges (qadi) who deduced the rules (Ahkam) and judged by their own ijtihad. Mu‚adh ibn Jabal (raa) was a governor (wali) at the time of the Prophet (pbuh) and used to deduce Ahkam and ruled in his wilayah by his own ijtihad. Abu Bakr and Umar (raa) both deduced akham by themselves during their ruling and both ruled the people with the ijtihad each of them had deduced.

Muawiya and Amr ibn al őAs were two governors who deduced Ahkam for themselves by their own ijtihad and ruled people in accordance with it in their provinces. In spite of the ijtihad undertaken by the judges and governors, the Khaleefah used to adopt certain Hukm and to order their execution by the people who would be obliged themselves to implement the adopted rules and to leave their own opinion and ijtihad on those rules. This is because the hukm shar‚i states that the Imam‚s decree is to be executed openly and covertly. Examples of this is Abu Bakr‚s adoption that the pronouncement of divorce three times in one sitting constitutes only one divorce, and his adoption that funds should be equally distributed among Muslims irrespective of the time when they embraced Islam or any other matter. The Muslims followed Abu Bakr in these adoptions and the judges and governors executed them. When őUmar came to office after him he adopted different opinions in the same questions. He obliged people to accept and execute the pronouncement of divorce three times in one sitting as three divorces, and he distributed the funds differently according to the time when the people had entered Islam and according to need. The Muslims followed őUmar in these adoptions and the judges and governors executed them. Umar also made the adoption that land obtained in war was a Ghanima owned by the Bayt al Mal (House of Funds), wherein the original owners would retain possession and not distribute the land to the Muslim soldiers or the Muslims. The governors and judges followed him in this adoption and enacted the hukm he had adopted. Accordingly, the consensus of the Companions (ijma‚a as-sahaba) confirms that the Imam has the authority to adopt certain rules to order that they be executed and the Muslims must obey him, even if their ijtihad differs from it.

Among the well known Shariőah principles are: őThe Sultan has the right to adopt decrees as numerous as the actual problems‚; őThe Imam‚s decree resolves the discord‚; and őThe Imam‚s command is executed openly and covertly‚.

Henceforth, the Khulafa‚ah adopted specific Ahkam. Haroon ar-Rasheed, for example, adopted the book őKitab al-Kharaj‚ in the economic affairs, and he obliged all the people to execute the Ahkam included within it.
 


Constitution and Canon

Canon is a foreign connotation which means the decree issued by the ruler for people to enact. It has been defined as őthe group of principles which the ruler obliges the people to enact in their relationships‚. The basic law for every government is called a constitution; whereas law which emanates from the system decreed by the constitution, is called a canon. The term constitution has been defined as őthe canon which specifies the shape of the state and its ruling system, and defines the limit and specification of the authority vested in it‚, or őthe canon which organises public authority, i.e., the government, defines its relationship with its subjects, and assigns both the state‚s rights and duties towards the subjects and the subjects‚ duties and rights towards the state‚. Constitutions have different origins. Some have been issued in the form of a canon, and some have arisen through customs and traditions, such as the British constitution, while others have been drafted by a committee of a national assembly - vested with the authority at that time - which passed the constitution, defined the procedure for revising it and then dissolved itself to be replaced by the authority established by the constitution, as happened in America and France. Constitutions and canons are taken from two sources. The first being the source from which they directly originate, such as traditions, religion, the opinions of jurists, court precedents and the principles of justice and equity. Which is known as the legislative source. Examples of this type of constitution are some of the Western states like Britain and America. The second is an historical source, i.e., the constitution or canon that emerges from, or is taken from a particular place, like the French Constitution and some of the states in the Islamic world, like Turkey, Egypt, Iraq and Syria.

This is but a brief definition of the terms constitution and canon, which in sum means the state takes certain rules from either legislative or historical sources which it adopts and enacts, such that thereafter the rules adopted by the state become a constitution, if they are general, or canons if they are specific.

The question that now faces the Muslims is whether or not it is permissible to use these terms? The answer to this question is that if foreign terms contain terms or logical connotations that contradict the terminology of Muslims, they are prohibited for use: such as the term ősocial justice‚, which implies a specific system which is manifested in the form of guaranteeing education, medical care for the poor and guaranteeing the rights of employees and workers. This connotation contradicts the Muslims terminological meaning for justice, because in Islam justice means the opposite of injustice, and the guaranteed provision of education and medical care is a right for rich and poor, and protecting the rights of the weak and needy is a right beholden to all those who hold citizenship of the Islamic State, whether they are employees, labourers or farmers etc. However, if the meaning of the terminology is consistent with what the Muslims‚ have then it is permissible to use that term, such as the term tax, which means the funds collected from the people for the management of the state and the Muslims do have funds collected by the state for the management of their affairs and, thus, it is correct to use the term tax. The terms constitution and canon mean that the state adopts certain rules, announces them to the people and obliges them to act according to them and governs them on their basis. This meaning is consistent with Islam. Accordingly, we do not find anything to object with the use of the terms constitution and canons, the rules adopted by the Khaleefah from the Ahkam Shariőah. However, which means there is a difference between the Islamic constitution and canons, on the one hand, and other constitutions and canons, on the other. The source of the other constitutions and canons are the traditions and judgements of their courts etc., and the origin is an institutional committee which establishes the constitution councils elected by the people to decree canons for they consider the people to be the source of authority and sovereignty. As for the Islamic constitution and canons, their source is the Qur‚an and Sunnah only, and their origin is the ijtihad of the mujtahideen from which the Khaleefah adopts certain rules, executes them and obliges the people to act according to them. Sovereignty is for the Shariőah and ijtihad is a right for all Muslims and a fard kifayah upon them to deduce Ahkam Shariőah. Only the Khaleefah has the right to adopt the Ahkam Shariőah.

This is with respect to the permissibility of using the terms constitution and canon. As for the necessity of adopting rules, the Muslims, from the time of Abu Bakr (raa) up to the time of the last Khaleefah, have seen the necessity of adopting rules according to which the Muslims have been commanded to act. This adoption was for specific rules and not a comprehensive adoption of all the decrees that the state ruled with. The State only adopted comprehensively in some eras, namely, when the Ayubites adopted Ash-Shafi‚i i madhab and when the őUthtmani State adopted Al-Hanafi madhab .

The question which is asked is, whether or not it is in the interest of the Muslims to lay down a comprehensive constitution and general canons? The answer to this question is that the presence of a comprehensive constitution and general canons for all rules stifles creative ability and ijtihad. Hence, the Khulafa‚ah in the age of the Companions (Sahabah), the followers of the Companions (tabe‚yeen), and the followers of the followers of the Companions (tab‚ee et-tabe‚yeen), avoided adopting all the rules. They merely restricted in adoption to specific rules where adoption was required to maintain the unity of ruling, legislation and administration. Therefore, for the sake of maintaining creative ability and ijtihad, it is preferable for the State not to have a comprehensive constitution which includes all the rules, but rather a constitution that includes general rules which define the form of the State and which guarantees the continuity of its unity, and leaves ijtihad and deduction to the governors and judges. This is the case if ijtihad is prevalent and people are mujtahideen as in the time of the Sahabah, tabe‚yeen, and tab‚ee et-tabe‚yeen. But if all the people are muqalideen, and where mujtahideen are rare, it is obligatory for the State to adopt rules by which the State, i.e. the Khaleefah, wala‚a and judges govern the people, because in such circumstances the governors and judges will suffer from differences and contradicting taqleed. However, adoption should come after studying the subject matter and daleel. Allowing the wala‚a and judges to rule from their own knowledge will lead to the existence of different and contradicting rules within the same state, even in the same province, and it could even lead to them judging with what Allah (swt) has not revealed. Therefore, because of the ignorance of Islam which prevails these days, it is obligatory for the Islamic State to adopt certain rules confined to the transactions and punishments, excluding adoption in őaqeedah and the ibadah.. This adoption should be inclusive for all the rules so as to punctuate the state‚s affairs and to conduct all the affairs of the Muslims in accordance with the rules of Allah (swt). When the state adopts the rules and establishes the constitution and canons, it must restrict itself solely to the Ahkam Shariőah. It must not adopt, or even study, anything other than the Ahkam Shariőah whether it agrees with Islam or not. For example, it must not adopt the nationalisation of property. Instead, it must lay down the rule (hukm) of public property. The state has to restrict itself by the Ahkam Shariőah in every matter connected with the thought (fikrah) and the method (tareeqah). But as for the canons and systems that are not connected with the fikrah and method and thus do not denote a certain view point of life, such as the administrative canons and departmental structures etc., considered to be means and styles, like the sciences, industries and technology, which the state may adopt to manage its affairs, as happened with Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) when he established the army registers (divans) which were taken over from the Persians. These administrative and technical matters are not part of the constitution or the Ahkam Shariőah and, therefore, are not included in the constitution. Therefore, the duty of the Islamic State is to observe that its constitution be Ahkam Shariőah i.e. that its constitution and canon be Islamic with and when it adopts any rule it has to adopt it based on the strength of the daleel shari‚ with the correct understanding of the subject matter. Hence, first it has to study the problem in order to understand it - because understanding the problem is essential - it must then understand the hukm shari‚ related to this problem, and then it has to study daleel of the hukm shari‚. The state then adopts this rule, based on the strength of daleel, on condition that these Ahkam Shariőah are adopted either from the opinion of one of the mujtahids - after looking through the daleel and validity of its strength (estinbat) - or through ijtihad shari‚, even in the single issue, from the Qur‚an and Sunnah, ijma‚a as-sahabah, or qiyas. Thus, for example, if the State wished to adopt forbidding insurance on goods, it has first to understand the nature of insurance on goods. It must study the means of possession. Allah‚s law concerning property would be applied on insurance and this would subsequently be adopted as the hukm shari‚ in this question. Accordingly, there should be an introduction to the constitution and to each canon that clearly explains the madhab from which each article has been deduced, the daleel relied upon, or, if the article was deduced by a correct ijtihad, an explanation of the daleel from which the article has been deduced, so that the Muslims know that the rules which the state has adopted in the constitution and canons are Ahkam Shariőah reached by a correct ijtihad. This is because the Muslims are not obliged to obey the laws of the State unless they are Ahkam Shariőah adopted by the State. According to this basis, the State adopts Ahkam Shariőah in the form of a constitution and canons in order to govern the people who hold its citizenship.

 

As an illustration of this, we place in the hands of Muslims a draft constitution for the Islamic State in the Islamic world to be studied by Muslims while they are proceeding to establish the Islamic State that will carry the Islamic da‚wah to the world. It should be noticed that this constitution is not meant for a particular country or intended to be specific to any region or country but for the Islamic State in the Islamic world.
 


A Draft Constitution

GENERAL RULES

Article 1
The Islamic creed (őaqeedah) constitutes the foundation of the State. Nothing is permitted to exist in the government‚s structure, regime, accountability, or any other aspect connected with the government, that does not take the creed as its source. The creed is also the source for the State‚s constitution and canons. Nothing connected to the constitution or canons, is permitted to exist unless it emanates from the Islamic creed.

Article 2
The domain of Islam (Dar al-Islam) is that entity which applies the rules of Islam in life‚s affairs and whose security is maintained by Muslims. The domain of disbelief (Dar al-Kufr) is that entity which applies the rules of kufr and whose security is maintained by the kuffar.

Article 3
The Khaleefah is empowered to adopt divine rules (Ahkam Shariőah) as canons and articles within the constitution. Once the Khaleefah has adopted a divine rule, that rule, singularly, becomes the divine rule that must be enacted and then implemented. Every citizen must openly and secretly obey that adopted rule.

Article 4
The Khaleefah must not adopt divine rules pertaining to worship, i.e., ibadat, except in connection with alms (zakat) and war (jihad). Also, he is not permitted to adopt any of the thoughts connected with the Islamic creed.

Article 5
All citizens of the Islamic State are entitled to enjoy the divine rights and duties.

Article 6
All citizens of the State shall be treated equally regardless of religion, race, colour or any other matter. The State is forbidden to discriminate among its citizens in all matters, be it ruling or judicial, or in welfare.

Article 7
The State implements the divine law on all citizens who hold citizenship of the Islamic State, whether Muslims or not, in the following manner:

a. The divine law is implemented in its entirety, without exception, on all Muslims;
b. Non-Muslims are allowed to follow their own beliefs and worships.
c. Those who are guilty of apostasy (murtad) from Islam are to be executed according to the rule of apostasy, provided they have themselves renounced Islam. If they are born as non-Muslims, i.e., if they are the sons of apostates, then they are treated as non-Muslims according to their status as being either polytheists (mushriks) or People of the Book.
d. In matters of food and clothing the non-Muslims are treated according to their religions within the limits set by Islam.
e. Marital affairs, including divorce, among non-Muslims are settled in accordance with their religions, but between non-Muslims and Muslims they are settled according to the divine law.
f. All the remaining Shariőah matters and rules, such as: the application of transactions, punishments and evidences (at court), the system of ruling and economics are implemented by the State upon everyone, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. This includes the people of treaties (mu‚aahid), the protected subjects (ahlu zimmah) and all who submit to the sovereignty of Islam. The implementation on these people is the same as the implementation on the subjects of the State. Ambassadors and envoys are treated in their affairs according to the arrangements agreed upon with their states.

Article 8
The Arabic language is the language of Islam and the sole language of the State.

Article 9
Ijtihad (personal exertion to derive the Islamic rule) is fard kifayah (a collective duty), the performance of which is obligatory on the community as a whole. If the duty is performed, the rest are relieved from it and every Muslim has the right to exercise ijtihad if he has acquired the necessary conditions to perform it.

Article 10
There is no such thing as a clergy in Islam as all Muslims bear the responsibility for Islam. The State will prevent anything that signifies the existence of a clergy among Muslims.

Article 11
The primary function of the State is the propagation of the invitation (da‚wah) to Islam.

Article 12
The only evidences to be considered for the divine rules (Ahkam Shariőah) are: the Qur‚an, the Sunnah, the consensus of the Companions (ijma‚a as-sahabah) and analogy (qiyas). Legislation cannot be taken from any source other than these evidences.

Article 13
Every individual is innocent until proven guilty. No person shall be punished without a court sentence. Torturing is absolutely forbidden and whoever inflicts torture on anyone shall be punished.

Article 14
All human actions are in origin restricted by the divine rules (Ahkam Shariőah), and no action shall be undertaken until its rule (hukm) is known. Every thing or object is permitted, i.e., halal, unless there is an evidence of prohibition.

Article 15
Any means that definitely leads to a prohibition (haram) is itself haram.
 

THE RULING SYSTEM

Article 16
The ruling system of the State is that of a unitary ruling system and not a federation.

Article 17
Ruling is centralised and administration is decentralised.

Article 18
There are four positions of ruling in the State. They are:

1. The Khaleefah
2. The delegated assistant (mo‚awin)
3. The governor (wali)
4. The mayor (a‚mil)

All other officials of the State are employees and not rulers.

Article 19
Nobody is permitted to take charge of ruling, or any action considered to be of the nature of ruling, except a male who is free, i.e., not a slave, trustworthy (adil) and Muslim.

Article 20
Calling upon the rulers to account for their actions is both a right for the Muslims and a fard kifayah (collective duty) upon them. Non-Muslim subjects have the right to make known their complaints about the rulers injustice and misapplication of the Islamic rules upon them.

Article 21
Muslims are entitled to establish political parties to question the rulers and to access the positions of ruling through the nation (Ummah) on condition that the parties are based on the creed of Islam and their adopted rules are divine rules; the establishment of such a party does not require a license by the State. Any party not established on the basis of Islam is prohibited.

Article 22
The ruling system is founded upon four principles. They are:

1. sovereignty belongs to the divine law (shar‚a) and not to the people;
2. authority belongs to the people, i.e., the Ummah;
3. the appointment of a Khaleefah into office is an obligation upon all Muslims;
4. only the Khaleefah has the right to adopt the Ahkam Shariőah and thus he passes the constitution and the various canons.

Article 23
The State system is built upon eight pillars. They are:

1. the Khaleefah
2. the delegated assistants
3. the executive assistants
4. the Amir of jihad
5. judges
6. governors of the provinces (Wilayat)
7. The administrative system
8. the consultative assembly (Majlis ash-Shura)
 

THE KHALEEFAH

Article 24
The Khaleefah is deputised by the nation with authority for the enactment of the divine law.

Article 25
The Khilafah is a contract of nomination and acceptance. No-one is obliged to accept it and no-one is obliged to nominate a particular person for it.

Article 26
Every mature male and female Muslim, who is sane, has the right to participate in the election of the Khaleefah and in giving him the pledge (bay‚ah). Non-Muslims have no right in this regard.

Article 27
Once the contract of the Khilafah has been confirmed on a person through the bay‚ah from those who are qualified to give it, the bay‚ah of the remaining people is a bay‚ah of obedience and not agreement. Consequently, those who may disobey it are obliged to submit.

Article 28
Nobody can become Khaleefah without being appointed by the Muslims. Nobody can hold the authority of the Khilafah unless it is acquired legitimately, as is the case with any contract in Islam.

Article 29
Any state which wishes to give the Khaleefah the bay‚ah of agreement must fulfil the following conditions :

a. the state must enjoy autonomy that is reliant solely on Muslims, and not on any disbelieving (kafir) state;
b. the security of the Muslims in the state, both internally and externally, must be maintained by the security of Islam and not kufr.

The bay‚ah of obedience - as opposed to the bay‚ah of agreement - can be taken from any state without the need to satisfy the aforementioned conditions.

Article 30
The individual who is given the bay‚ah for Khaleefah need only fulfil the agreement conditions [listed in Article 31]. He need not fulfil the preferred conditions, because what is essential is the conditions of agreement.

Article 31
There are six conditions of agreement that are necessary for an individual to become a Khaleefah. They are:

1. male
2. Muslim
3. free
4. mature
5. sane and
6. just (adl).

Article 32
If the post of the Khaleefah becomes vacant, due to death, resignation or dismissal, the appointment of a new Khaleefah must take place within three days of the date when it became vacant.

Article 33
The Khaleefah is to be appointed in the following manner:

a. The Muslim members of the Majlis ash-Shura check and determine the number of candidates to stand for election for the post of Khaleefah. These names are subsequently announced and the Muslims are asked to elect one person from this list of candidates.

b. The results of the election are to be announced and the person who has attained the majority of the votes is to be announced to the Muslims.

c. The Muslims must hasten to give the bay‚ah to the candidate - who has attained the majority of votes - as a Khaleefah to follow the Qur‚an and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (saw).

d. Once the bay‚ah has been accomplished, the name of the candidate who has become the Khaleefah along with a statement that he is qualified with all the agreement conditions necessary for holding the office of Khaleefah is announced to the people so that the news of his appointment reaches the entire Ummah.

Article 34
The Ummah appoints the Khaleefah but is not empowered to dismiss him after he has legitimately attained the bay‚ah of agreement.

Article 35
The Khaleefah is the State. He possesses the following authority within the State:

1. The Khaleefah establishes the divine rules by his adoption and implementation of them, and as such they become the legal canons that must be obeyed and not transgressed.

2. The Khaleefah is responsible for both the internal and external policies of the State. He takes charge of the leadership of the army and has the right to declare war, conclude peace, armistice, and treaties.

3. The Khaleefah has the authority to accept and reject foreign ambassadors, and to appoint and dismiss Muslim ambassadors.

4. The Khaleefah appoints and dismisses the assistants (mo‚awin) and the governors (wula‚a). The assistants and governors are responsible to the Khaleefah and Majlis ash-Shura.

5. The Khaleefah appoints and dismisses the chief judge, the directors of departments, the leaders of the armed forces and the chief of staff; all of whom are responsible to the Khaleefah and not the Majlis ash-Shura.

6. The Khaleefah must adopt the divine rules by which the State‚s budget is set. The Khaleefah has to decide on its chapters and the funds required for every field, whether they be related to revenue or expenditure.

Article 36
The Khaleefah is restricted in what he adopts by the divine rules. He is forbidden to adopt any rule that is not soundly deduced from the divine texts. He is restricted to the rules he has adopted and to the method for deducing the rule that he has chosen. Accordingly, he is prevented from adopting a rule deduced by a method that contradicts the method he has adopted, and he must not enact any command that contradicts the rules he has adopted.

Article 37
The Khaleefah has the absolute right to conduct the citizens affairs according to his ijtihad, but he is not allowed to disagree with a divine rule on account of benefit. For example; he must not prevent citizens from importing products on the pretext of protecting the State‚s industries; he must not fix prices on the pretext of preventing exploitation; and he must not force home owners to lease their houses on the pretext of increasing the supply of housing. The Khaleefah must not forbid any halal thing or allow any haram thing.

Article 38
There is no limitation on the Khaleefah‚s period in office, as long as he abides by the divine law, implements its rules and is able to manage the State‚s affairs. If the Khaleefah‚s situation changes in such a way as to discharge him from the office of Khilafah, he is to be dismissed immediately.

Article 39
There are three matters which, if they change, discharge the Khaleefah from the office of Khilafah. They are:

1. If one of the qualifying conditions of the Khilafah agreement becomes void, such as apostatising from Islam, insanity or manifest sinfulness (fisq) etc., because these are the conditions essential for the conferment of the agreement and its continuity.

2. His inability to undertake the responsibilities of the position of Khaleefah for any reason.

3. In the event of subdual, whereby the Khaleefah is rendered unable to conduct the affairs of the Muslims by his own opinions according to the divine law. If the Khaleefah is subdued by any force to an extent that he is unable to manage the citizens affairs by his own opinion according to the rules of the divine law, he is considered to be legitimately incapable of undertaking the duty for which he has been charged, and hence is to be dismissed from the office of Khilafah. This situation may arise under two circumstances. They are:

a. When one, or more, of the Khaleefah‚s entourage exerts control over the management of affairs. If there is a chance that the Khaleefah could rid himself of their dominance he is given a warning for a specified period of time, after which, if he fails to rid himself of their dominance, he must be dismissed. If it appears that there is no chance of the Khaleefah freeing himself from their dominance, he is to be dismissed immediately.

b. Should the Khaleefah be captured by a subduing enemy, whether he is actually captured or under its influence, the situation is to be examined; if there is a chance to rescue the Khaleefah, he is given a period of time until it appears that there is no hope to rescue him, after which he is dismissed. Should it appear from the outset that there is no hope of rescuing him, he is to be dismissed immediately.

Article 40
The responsibility of deciding whether or not the Khaleefah‚s situation has altered in such a way as to warrant his dismissal is the prerogative of the Court for the Acts of Injustice (mahkumat ul-madhalim), only it has the authority to admonish or dismiss the Khaleefah.
 

DELEGATED ASSISTANTS

Article 41
The Khaleefah appoints assistants delegated with the authority to assist him in undertaking the responsibility of ruling. He deputises them to manage affairs with their own point of view and ijtihad.

Article 42
The delegated assistants must be qualified with the same essential qualifications of the Khaleefah, viz., male, free, Muslim, sane and just. Additionally assistants must be competent in the tasks for which they are deputised to undertake.

Article 43
The appointment of the delegated assistants must entail both deputation and a general responsibility. Thus, in the appointment of the assistants, the Khaleefah must pronounce a statement to the effect of őI appoint you on my behalf as my deputy‚ or any other statement that confers both deputation and general responsibility. Unless the delegated assistant is appointed in this manner he would not hold the authority of a delegated assistant and thus would not be a delegated assistant.

Article 44
The function of the delegated assistant, to distinguish between him and the Khaleefah in his authority, is to inform the Khaleefah of the matters the delegated assistant has managed and the appointments and delegated duties he has implemented. Therefore, the function of the delegated assistant is to inform the Khaleefah of his analysis and, unless the Khaleefah prevents him, to carry it out.

Article 45
The Khaleefah has to examine the actions and disposals of the delegated assistants so as to confirm what is sound and to adjust that which is wrong, because the management of the nations affairs is entrusted to the Khaleefah and is the subject of his own ijtihad.

Article 46
Once the delegated assistant has managed a matter with the acquiescence of the Khaleefah, he has the right to carry it out - as acknowledged - without any alteration. If the Khaleefah revises the matter and objects to what the delegated assistant has executed, the following considerations apply: If the Khaleefah has objected to what the delegated assistant has carried out in regard to a rule implemented soundly, or a fund spent justly, then the view of the delegated assistant must be enacted, because it is the original view of the Khaleefah and the Khaleefah must not redress laws that he has implemented and funds that he has spent. But if the delegated assistant has implemented something else, such as the appointment of a wali or the equipping of the army, then the Khaleefah has the right to object and to overrule the decision of the delegated assistant, because the Khaleefah has the right to revise and redress his own decisions in such cases and hence those of the delegated assistant.

Article 47
Delegated assistants have a general deputation and therefore must not be assigned to specific departments or types of action; they must undertake general supervision of the administrative system and must not undertake administrative matters.
 

EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT

Article 48
The Khaleefah has to appoint an executive assistant whose function is executive and not ruling. His duty is to execute the instructions of the Khaleefah in both the internal and external affairs of the State and to relay to the Khaleefah what is received from these areas. This administration office is a medium between the Khaleefah and others, i.e., it executes instructions on his behalf and conveys to him.

Article 49
The executive assistant must be a Muslim because he is one of the Khaleefah‚s entourage.

Article 50
The executive assistant is always in direct contact with the Khaleefah; the same way the delegated assistants are. The executive assistant is considered an assistant but in execution instead of ruling.
 

AMIR OF JIHAD

Article 51
The directorates of the Amir of jihad consist of four departments, they are:

1. External affairs,
2. The military,
3. The internal security, and
4. Industry.

The Amir of jihad is the supervisor and director of all four departments.

Article 52
The Department of External Affairs directs the foreign affairs connected with the relationship of the Khilafah with foreign countries, whatever they may be.

Article 53
The Military Department oversees all affairs connected with the military forces, such as: the army, the police, equipment, armament supplies, duties etc. It also includes control of the military academies, military missions, and everything deemed necessary from the Islamic culture and the culture of the army and whatever is related to warfare and its preparation.

Article 54
The Department of Internal Security oversees everything connected with security by means of the military forces, particularly the police.

Article 55
The Department of Industry directs all affairs connected with industry, including heavy industry, such as the production of motors, engines and car bodies; metallurgical industries, electronics and light industry; and factories of private and public ownership connected with the military industry. All factories of whatever type should be established on the basis of the military policy.
 

THE ARMY

Article 56
Jihad is a compulsory duty (fard) on all Muslims. Military training is therefore compulsory. Thus, every male Muslim, fifteen years and over, is obliged to undergo military training to prepare for jihad. Conscription, however, is fard kifayah.

Article 57
The army is divided into two: the regulars, who are paid salaries from the State‚s budget as employees, and the reservists, who comprise all the Muslims capable of fighting.

Article 58
The military forces are one power which is the army from which certain divisions are selected and organised in a particular way and provided with a certain culture, these are called policemen.

Article 59
The police are authorised to protect public order, supervise internal security and to perform all the executive duties.

Article 60
The army possesses flags and banners; the Khaleefah gives the flag to whomever he appoints as a leader of the army, the banners are introduced by the brigadiers.

Article 61
The Khaleefah is the leader of the army, he appoints the commander-in-chief, a general for each brigade and a commander for each division. The Brigadiers and commanders appoint the remaining ranks of the army. Members of the general staff are appointed according to their military culture, and are appointed by the general chief of staff.

Article 62
The army comprises one army located in specific camps. Some of these camps must be located in different provinces (wilayat) and strategic locations, and some must remain permanently mobile fighting forces. The camps are organised in numerous groups, each one of which is given a number to accompany its name, such as the first army, the third army or can be named after a province (wilayat) or district (őimala).

Article 63
It is necessary to provide the army with the highest possible level of military education and to elevate its intellectual level as far as possible, and to provide every member in the army with the Islamic culture that enables him to have a general awareness of Islam.

Article 64
Each camp should have a sufficient number of officers of the general staff who have attained the highest level of military knowledge and experience in devising plans and directing battles. The army as a whole should have as many officers of the general staff as possible.

Article 65
It is necessary to provide the army with all the required armaments, supplies and equipment so as to fulfil its duty as an Islamic army.
 

THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM

Article 66
Judgement constitutes the obligatory pronouncement of the divine rule. It settles the disputes among people, prevents that which harms the community‚s rights and eliminates the disputes arising between people and members of the ruling system - rulers and employees - including the Khaleefah and those of lesser rank.

Article 67
The Khaleefah is to appoint a chief judge authorised to appoint, discipline, and dismiss judges within the regulations of the administration. The chief judge must be a mature Muslim male who is sane, just and a jurist. The remaining employees of the courts come under the domain of the directorate that administers the court affairs.

Article 68
There are three types of judges. They are:
1. The judge who settles the disputes among people in transactions and punishments;
2. The muhtasib who judges upon violations of the community‚s rights; and
3. The judge of the Court for the Unjust Acts (mahkamat ul-madhalim) who settles disputes between people and officials of the State.

Article 69
All judges must be qualified by being Muslim, mature, free, sane, just, and a jurist being aware of how to apply rules in a situation. Judges of the Court for the Unjust Acts must additionally be qualified with being male and a mujtahid, i.e., a person capable of making ijtihad.

Article 70
The judge and the muhtasib may be given a general appointment to pronounce judgement on all problems throughout the State, or alternatively they can be given an appointment to a particular location and to give judgement on particular cases. On the other hand, the judge of the Court for the Unjust Acts must be given a general appointment to pronounce judgement on all problems, but in terms of location he may be appointed to a particular location or all over the State.

Article 71
The courts should be comprised of only one judge who has the authority to pronounce judgement. But one or more judges are permitted to accompany him with only the authority of advising and assisting. They have no authority to pronounce judgement and their opinion is not binding on the judge who has the sole authority to give judgement.

Article 72
The judge cannot pronounce judgement except in a court session. Evidence and oaths are not considered except in a court session as well.

Article 73
It is permissible to vary the grades of courts in respect to the type of cases. Some judges may thus be assigned to certain cases of particular grades, and other courts authorised to judge the other cases.

Article 74
There are no courts of appeal or annulment, because all judgements are of equal standing. Thus, when the judge has pronounced the verdict it becomes effective and no other judge‚s decision can overturn it.

Article 75
The muhtasib is the judge who investigates all cases, in the absence of an individual litigation, involving the rights of the public that are non-criminal and not involving the hudud (i.e., the punishments.)

Article 76
The muhtasib has the authority to judge upon violations, wherever the location. He acquires knowledge of these violations without the need to hold a court session. A number of policemen are put at the muhtasib‚s disposal to carry out his orders and to execute his judgements immediately.

Article 77
The muhtasib has the right to appoint deputies to himself, that possess the same qualifications as the muhtasib, and to assign them to various locations where they practice with the same authority as the muhtasib in the location in the cases assigned to them.

Article 78
The judge of the Court for the Unjust Acts is appointed to remove all unjust acts, committed by the Khaleefah, governor(s), or any official of the State, that have been inflicted upon anyone - whether that person is a citizen or not - living in the domain of the State.

Article 79
Judges in the Court for the Act of Injustice are appointed by the Khaleefah and the chief judge. However, neither the Khaleefah nor the chief judge has the right to dismiss them. Their performance is controlled by the Court for the Unjust Acts and it alone is responsible for taking them to task.

Article 80
There is no limit on the number of judges that can be appointed to the Court for the Unjust Acts. The Khaleefah can appoint as many as he may deem necessary to eradicate the unjust acts. Although it is permitted for more than one judge to sit in a court session, only one judge has the authority to pronounce a judgement. The other judges only assist and provide advice, and their advice is not binding on the judge authorised to pronounce the judgement.

Article 81
The Court for the Unjust Acts has the authority to dismiss any ruler, governor and official of the State, including the Khaleefah.

Article 82
The Court for the Unjust Acts has the authority to investigate any case of iniquity, whether it be connected with officials of the State, the Khaleefah‚s deviation from the divine rules, interpretation of the legislative texts in the constitution, canons and divine rules within the framework adopted by the Khaleefah, the imposition of a tax, etc.

Article 83
The judicature of the Unjust Acts is not restricted by a court session or the request of the defendant or the presence of the plaintiff. It has the authority to look into any case of injustice even if there is no plaintiff.

Article 84
Everyone, both defendant and plaintiff, has the right to appoint a proxy, whether male or female, Muslim or not, to act on his/her behalf. There is no distinction between him/her and the proxy. The proxy has the right to be appointed on a salary according to the terms agreed upon between the person and his or her proxy.

Article 85
It is permitted for the one who holds office, such as the Khaleefah, wali, official, muhtasib and judge of the Court for the Unjust Acts, or persons who have been vested with a specific responsibility, like a custodian or guardian, to appoint a person to his position as a proxy - within the bounds of his authority - for the purpose of appearing on his/her behalf as the plaintiff or defendant, and for no other reason.
 

THE GOVERNORS OF THE PROVINCES (WUL‚AA)

Article 86
The territories governed by the State are divided into units called provinces (wilayat). Each wilayat is divided into units called districts (őimalat). The person who governs the wilayat is called the wali or Amir, and the person who governs the őimalat is called the 'amil.

Article 87
The walis and the őamils are appointed by the Khaleefah. The wali can, if authorised, also appoint the őamils. The walis and 'amils must possess the same qualifications as the Khaleefah, i.e., Muslim, male, free, sane, just and competent in their responsibilities. They are to be selected from the people of piety (taqwa) and strength.

Article 88
The wali has the authority to govern and supervise the performance of the departments in his province in his capacity as the deputy of the Khaleefah. He has the same authority in the province as the delegate assistant has in the Khilafah State. He has command over the people of his province and control over all affairs except finance, the judiciary and the army. He has command over the police in respect of conduct, but not in administration.

Article 89
The wali is not obliged to inform the Khaleefah of what he has carried out within his authorised command, but if a new problem arises, he has to wait until he has informed the Khaleefah about it, and then proceeds according to the instructions of the Khaleefah. If, as a result of waiting, the problem would be exacerbated, he must act first and then inform the Khaleefah later on about the reason for not informing him.

Article 90
Every province has an assembly elected from its people, and headed by the wali. The assembly has the authority to participate in expressing opinions on administrative matters and not ruling; their opinions are not binding.

Article 91
The wali‚s term of office in a particular province is not to be long. He must be discharged whenever he becomes powerful in his province and/or the people become enchanted with him.

Article 92
The wali‚s appointment is a general responsibility in a defined location. Consequently, the wali is not moved from one province to another. He has to be discharged first and then reappointed.

Article 93
The wali can be discharged if the Khaleefah decides so, or if the majlis as-shura expresses dissatisfaction with him - whether justified or not - or if the majority of the people of the province appear displeased with him. However, the wali can only be dismissed by the Khaleefah.

Article 94
The Khaleefah must exercise strict control over the walis and continually assess their performance. He must deputise people to monitor them and periodically gather such people, all or some, and listen to their complaints about the walis.
 

THE ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM

Article 95
The management of the government‚s affairs and the interests of the people is performed by, and the responsibility of, administrations, directorates and departments.

Article 96
The administrations, directorates and departments are built upon the principles of: efficiency of the system, speed in carrying out the tasks and competence in those who are in charge of them.

Article 97
Any subject of the State, male or female, Muslim or not, who is suitably competent may be appointed as the head or official of any administration, directorate or department.

Article 98
Every administration must have a general manager and every directorate and department must have a special director responsible for them. All directors are responsible to the general manager for their administrations, directorates and departments. In respect to conforming to the laws and public orders, they are responsible to the Khaleefah, wali and 'amil.

Article 99
The managers and directors of all the administrations, directorates and departments are to be dismissed only for reasons connected with administrative regulations. It is permitted to move them from one post to another and to suspend them. The general manager of each administration, directorate or department is responsible for the appointing, dismissing, transferring, suspending and disciplining.

Article 100
Employees, other than the directors and the managers, are appointed, transferred, suspended, questioned, disciplined or dismissed by the general manager of their administration, directorate or department.
 

THE CONSULTATIVE ASSEMBLY (Majlis ash-Shura)

Article 101
The membership of the Majlis ash-Shura consists of those people who represent the Muslims in respect of expressing their views to the Khaleefah when consulted. Non-Muslims are allowed to be members of the Majlis as-Shura so that they can voice their complaints in respect to unjust acts performed by the rulers and/or the misapplication of the Islamic laws.

Article 102
The members of the Majlis ash-Shura are elected by the people.

Article 103
Every citizen of the State has the right to become a member of the Majlis as-Shura, provided he or she is both mature and sane. This applies to Muslim and non-Muslim. However, membership to non-Muslims is confined to their voicing of complaints in respect to unjust acts performed by the rulers and/or the misapplication of Islam upon them.

Article 104
Consultation (Shura) constitutes the seeking of views, while the mashura constitutes the seeking of binding views. Matters of legislation, definitions, expertise, science and technology are not to be considered mashurah; all other matters are considered mashurah.

Article 105
All citizens, Muslim or not, may express their views, but shura is a right for the Muslims only.

Article 106
All issues that fall under the category of mashura are decided on the basis of the majority opinion, irrespective of whether it is considered to be correct or not. In all other matters of shura, the correct opinion is sought, whether it is a majority or minority held view.

Article 107
The Majlis ash-Shura is charged with four duties. They are:

1a. To arrive at the binding view of the Majlis on matters that are considered mashura, such as: affairs of ruling, education, health, and the economy. In all other matters, such as: foreign policy, finance and the army, which are not considered mashura, the opinion of the Majlis ash-Shura is not necessarily sought.

1b. To question the government on all actions it actually carried out, whether they be internal or external affairs, financial or military. In matters where the majority view decides, the majority view is binding. Where the majority view is not sought, the viewpoint is not binding. In the event of the Majlis ash-Shura and the rulers disagreeing on an action from the view point of the Shariőah, the verdict of the Mahkamat ul-Madhalim is to decide.

2. To express dissatisfaction with the governors and assistants, and in this matter the view of the Majlis is binding and the Khaleefah must discharge them at once.

3. To discuss and express opinion on the rules, the constitution and canons, that the Khaleefah intends to adopt and which he has presented to the Majlis. The views of the Majlis are not binding in this matter, though they have the right to express their views; non-Muslims have no such right.

4. To select the list of candidates to stand for the position of Khaleefah; no candidate excluded from this list may stand and the decision of the Majlis is binding. Only Muslim members of the majlis may participate in drawing up this list.
 

THE SOCIAL SYSTEM

Article 108
The primary role of a woman is that of a mother and wife. She is an honour that must be protected.

Article 109
Men and women are basically to be segregated from each other, and they should not mix together except for a requirement permitted by the shar'a, such as buying and selling, or for a purpose which the shar‚a allows mixing, like the pilgrimage.

Article 110
Women have the same rights and obligations as men, except for those specified by the Shariőah evidence to be for man. Thus, she has the right to: practice in trading, farming, and industry; to partake in contracts and transactions; to possess all manners of property; to invest her funds by herself (or by others); and to conduct all of life‚s affairs by herself.

Article 111
A woman can participate in the election and giving of the bay‚ah to the Khaleefah, and elect, and also be, a member of the Majlis ash-Shura, and can be appointed as an official of the State in a non-ruling position. This includes the position of a judge, but not in Mahkamat ul-Madhalim.

Article 112
Women are not allowed to take charge of ruling, thus women cannot hold the positions of Khaleefah, wali, őamil, a judge of the Mahkamat ul Madhalim, and is prevented from practising any of the actions of ruling.

Article 113
Women live within a public and private life. Within their public life, they are allowed to live with other women, maharem males [males forbidden to them in marriage] and men they can marry on condition that nothing of the women‚s body is revealed, apart from her face and hands, and that the clothing is not revealing nor her charms displayed.

Article 114
Women are forbidden to be in private with any men they can marry, they are also forbidden to display their charms or to reveal their body in front of men they can marry.

Article 115
Men and women must not practice any immoral action or anything which causes corruption within society that may stem from the Shariőah rules, such as employing a female or male air host(ess), waiter or barber merely to take advantage of their sex.

Article 116
Marital life is one of tranquillity and companionship. The responsibility of the husband on behalf of his wife is one of taking care, and not ruling her. She is obliged to obey her husband and he is obliged to meet the costs of her livelihood according to the seemly standard of living.

Article 117
The married couple must assist each other in performing the household duties, with the husband performing all the actions normally undertaken outside of the house, and the woman performing those actions normally undertaken inside the house as best as she can. The husband should provide home-help as required to assist with the household tasks she cannot manage herself.

Article 118
The custody of children is both a right and duty of the mother, whether Muslim or not, so long as the child is in need of this care. When children, girls or boys, are no longer in need of care, they are to choose which parent they wish to live with, this applies if both parents are Muslim. If one of the parents or guardians is Muslim, there is no choice in the matter, the child is to join the Muslim.
 

THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM

Article 119
Economic policy is the view of what the society ought to be when addressing the satisfaction of its needs, so what the society ought to be is taken as the basis for satisfying the needs.

Article 120
The fundamental economic question is how to distribute funds and benefits to all subjects of the State, and to facilitate all the subjects to utilise these funds and benefits by enabling them to strive and possess them.

Article 121
Every individual must have his basic needs provided for completely by the State, and it must facilitate to the highest possible level the consumption of non-basic needs.

Article 122
Allah is alone the owner of property and He has gifted it to human beings. By this general donation mankind has acquired the right to possess property. As a consequence of Allah‚s (swt) permission for the individual to possess property, man has the actual possession.

Article 123
There are three types of property, they are: private property, public property, and State property.

Article 124
Private property is a divine rule determined by the substance of the property or the benefit from it. As a result of this possession, the person who possesses it obtains a benefit from it or receives a price for it.

Article 125
Public property is the shar'a permission for the community to participate in obtaining benefit from the property.

Article 126
State property comprises all property whose expenditure is determined solely by the view of the Khaleefah and his ijtihad, such as: the funds of taxes, land tax (kharaj) and head tax (jizya).

Article 127
Private property consisting of liquid and fixed assets is restricted by the following divine causes:

a. Work
b. Inheritance
c. Acquisition of property to survive
d. A donation from State funds to a citizen
e. Funds obtained by individuals not by effort or through purchase.

Article 128
The disposal of property is restricted by the permission of the Legislator, i.e., Allah, (swt) whether it is spending or investing of property. Squandering, extravagance and miserliness are forbidden. Also forbidden are the Capitalist companies, co-operatives, all other illegal transactions, usury (riba), fraud, monopolies, gambling and the like.

Article 129
Tithed land (al ushriah) constitutes land within the Arabian peninsula and land whose owners had embraced Islam, whilst possessing the land, before the Islamic State encountered them by jihad. Tax land (al kharajiah) is all land, other than the Arabian peninsula, which was opened by jihad, i.e., war or reconciliation. Al ushriah -land, together with its benefits, is owned by individuals. Al kharajiah land is owned by the State, and individuals own its benefits. Everyone has the right to exchange, through shar'a contracts, tithed land and the benefits from tax land. All people can inherit these, the same as with other properties.

Article 130
Uncultivated land is acquired by giving life to the land, i.e., irrigating it, or by protecting it, i.e., erecting fencing. Cultivated land can only be acquired by way of shar‚a causes, such as: inheritance, purchasing it, or through a donation from the State.

Article 131
Leasing land, whether al ushriah-land or al kharajiah-land, for agriculture is forbidden. Sharecropping of land planted with trees is permitted, and sharecropping on all other land is forbidden.

Article 132
Every landlord is obliged to use his land, those who are needy are to be given a loan from the treasury (bayt al-mal) to facilitate this. Anyone who leaves his land fallow, i.e., does not use the land, for three years will have it taken from him to be given to another.

Article 133
The following three categories constitute public property:

a. Public utilities, such as the town square.
b. Vast mineral resources, like oil fields.
c. Things which, by their nature, preclude ownership by individuals, such as rivers.

Article 134
Factories by their nature are private property. However, they follow the rule of the product manufactured within it. If the product is private property, the factory is considered to be private property, like a textile mill. If the product is a public property, like iron ore, then the factory is considered to be a public property.

Article 135
The State has no right to change private property into public property, because public property is determined by its nature and not by the view of the State.

Article 136
Everybody in the State has the right to utilise public property, and the State has no right to allow any individual to singularly possess, own or utilise public property.

Article 137
The State is allowed to protect uncultivated land or public property on behalf of any of the citizens' interests.

Article 138
Hoarding funds, even if zakah is paid on it, is forbidden.

Article 139
Zakah is collected from Muslims on their properties that are specified by shar‚a, i.e., money, goods, cattle and grain. It is not taken from anything not specified by the shar‚a. Zakah is taken from every owner whether legally accountable, i.e., mature and sane, or not, i.e., immature and insane. It is recorded in a specific account of the bayt al-mal and is not to be spent except on behalf of one or more of the eight categories of people mentioned in the Glorious Qur'an.

Article 140
Jizyah (head-tax) is collected from the non-Muslims (dhimmis). It is to be taken from the mature men if they are financially capable of paying it. It is not taken from women or children.

Article 141
Kharaj (land-tax) is collected on al-kharajiah land according to its potential production. However, in respect of al ushriah land zakah is payable on it on the basis of its actual production.

Article 142
The Muslims pay the tax that shar‚a has permitted to cover the expenditure of bayt al mal, on condition that it is levied on that which is surplus to the individual‚s conventional needs. The tax must be sufficient to cover the demands of the State. Non-Muslims do not pay any tax except the jizya.

Article 143
The State has the right to collect tax from its citizenry when the funds of bayt al mal are inadequate to cover the expenditure required to undertake all the functions the shar‚a has obliged the Muslims to perform. The State is not allowed to impose a tax on the people for a function the shar‚a has not obliged the Muslims to undertake. Thus, the State is not allowed to collect fees for the courts or departments or administrations, or for accomplishing any interests.

Article 144
The budget of the State has permanent sources decided by the Ahkam Shariőah. The budget is further divided into sections. The funds assigned to each section and the matters for which the funds are allocated are all decided by the view of the Khaleefah and his ijtihad.

Article 145
The permanent sources of income for bayt al-mal are: spoils (faya), jizya, kharaj, a fifth of the buried treasure (rikaz) and zakah. All these funds are collected, whether there is a need for them or not, on a perpetual basis.

Article 146
If the revenue derived from the permanent sources of income for bayt al-mal are insufficient to cover the expenditure of the State, it is permitted to collect taxes from the Muslims to cover the expenditure obliged on bayt al-mal. The obligations are the following:

a. The needs of the poor, the needy, the travellers, and to perform the obligation of jihad.
b. Remuneration of the salaries of the employees, the rulers and the provisions for the soldiers.
c. Providing benefits and public utilities, such as constructing roads, extracting water, erecting mosques, schools and hospitals.
d. Meeting emergencies, like natural disasters, famine, floods and earthquakes.

Article 147
Income derived from: public and State property, people dying without heirs and customs levied at the state‚s borders (thoghoor), are all recorded in bayt al-mal.

Article 148
The expenditure of bayt al-mal is distributed among the following six categories of people as follows:

a. The eight categories of people entitled to partake of the zakah funds. If there are no funds in this chapter they are not given any money.
b. The poor, the needy, the travellers, the debtors and jihad are funded from the permanent sources of revenue whenever there are insufficient funds in the zakah account. When there are inadequate funds from the permanent revenues, the debtors are not to receive assistance. The poor, the needy, the travellers and jihad must be funded from the taxes collected for this purpose; and if required - to prevent them from falling into corruption - they are to be funded from loans raised by the State for this purpose.
c. Bayt al mal must fund those people who perform certain duties or services for the State, such as employees, rulers and soldiers. If there are insufficient funds for this purpose, taxes must be collected immediately to meet their expenses, and loans should be raised if it is feared that corruption might ensue.
d. Bayt al mal shall fund the essential services and utilities such as the roads, mosques, hospitals and schools. If there are insufficient funds, taxes must be collected to cover their cost.
e. Non-essential services and utilities are funded by bayt al mal, but when there are insufficient funds available they are not financed and accordingly delayed.
f. Disasters, such as earthquakes and floods, must be financed by bayt al mal; if there are insufficient funds available, loans are to be raised immediately, and will be repaid later from taxes.

Article 149
The State should provide employment for all subjects holding citizenship of the State.

Article 150
Company employees and the self-employed have the same rights and duties as employees of the State. Everyone who works for a wage, irrespective of the nature of the work, is considered an employee. In matters of dispute, between employer and employee over salary levels, the salary level is to be assessed on the basis of the market. If they disagree over something else, the employment contract is to be assessed according to the rules of the shar'a.

Article 151
The salary is to be determined according to the benefit of the work and employee, and not according to the knowledge and/or qualification of the employee. There are to be no annual increments for employees. Instead, they are to be given the full value of the salary they deserve for the work they do.

Article 152
The State is to guarantee the living expenses of those who have no money, no employment and no relatives responsible for them. The State is responsible for housing and maintaining the disabled and handicapped people.

Article 153
The State must endeavour to circulate wealth among all the subjects and forbids the movement of wealth among only a sector of society.

Article 154
The State tackles the task of enabling every subject to satisfy his non-basic needs, and to achieve equality in society, in the following way:

a. The State grants all subjects liquid and fixed assets from those deposited with bayt al mal, and from the war booties, etc.
b. The State donates from its cultivated land to those who have insufficient or no land. Those who possess land but do not use it are not given land. Those who are unable to use their land are given financial assistance to enable them to use their land.
c. Those who are unable to settle their debts are given funds from zakah, and the war booty, etc.
d. The State donates from the public property to enable its subjects to satisfy their non-basic needs and to achieve equality in society.

Article 155
The State supervises agricultural affairs and their products in accordance with the needs of the agricultural policy, whose objective is to fulfil the potential of the land to its greatest level of production.

Article 156
The State completely supervises the affairs of industry. It undertakes those industries included as public property.

Article 157
International commerce is assessed on the basis of the citizenship of the trader and not the origin of the goods. Merchants from countries in a state of war with the State are prevented from trading in the State, unless given a special permission for the merchant or the goods. Merchants from countries that have treaties with the State are treated according to the terms of the treaty. Merchants who are subjects of the State are prevented from exporting strategic and needed materials. However, they are not prevented from importing any property they own.

Article 158
All individual subjects of the State have the right to establish research and development laboratories connected with life‚s affairs. The State should also establish such laboratories.

Article 159
Individuals are prevented from possessing laboratories producing materials that could harm the public interest or cause harm prohibited by Shariőah.

Article 160
The State provides free health care for all, but it does not prevent private medical practices nor the sale of medicine.

Article 161
The use of foreign capital and its investment within the State is forbidden. It is also prohibited to grant franchises to foreigners.

Article 162
The State issues its own currency, which is independent of all foreign currencies.

Article 163
The currency of the State is to be restricted to gold and silver, whether minted or not. No other form of currency for the State is permitted. The State can issue coinage not of gold or silver provided that the treasury of the State (bayt al-mal) has the equivalent amount of gold and silver to cover the issued coinage. Thus, the State may issue coinage in its name from brass, bronze or paper notes etc. as long as it is covered completely by gold and silver.

Article 164
It is absolutely forbidden to open banks. The only bank permitted is the State bank which is a department of bayt al mal. It does not deal in usury (riba) and its function is to provide financial loans in accordance with the Shariőah rules and to facilitate financial and monetary transactions.

Article 165
It is permissible to exchange between the State currency and the currency of other states like the exchanging between the state‚s own coinage. It is permissible for the exchange rate between two currencies to fluctuate provided the currencies are different from each other. However, such transactions must be undertaken in a hand-to-hand manner and constitute a direct transaction with no delay involved. All citizens can buy whatever currency they require from within or outside the State, and they can purchase the required currency without obtaining prior permission.
 

EDUCATION POLICY

Article 166
The Islamic creed constitutes the basis upon which the education policy is built. The syllabi and methods of teaching are designed to prevent a departure from this basis.

Article 167
The purpose of education is to form the Islamic personality in thought and behaviour. Therefore, all subjects in the curriculum must be rooted on this basis.

Article 168
The goal of education is to produce the Islamic personality and to provide people with the knowledge connected with life‚s affairs. Teaching methods are established to fulfil this goal.

Article 169
A distinction should be drawn between the empirical sciences such as mathematics, on the one hand, and the cultural sciences, on the other. The empirical sciences, and all that is related to them, are taught according to the need and are not restricted to any stage of education. As for the cultural sciences, they are taught at the primary and secondary levels according to a specific policy which does not contradict Islamic thoughts and rules. In higher education, these cultural sciences are studied like other sciences provided they do not lead to a departure from the stated goal of the education policy.

Article 170
The Islamic culture must be taught at all levels of education. In higher education, departments should be assigned to the various Islamic disciplines as will be done with medicine, engineering, physics etc.

Article 171
Arts and industries may be related to science, such as commerce, navigation and agriculture. In such cases, they are studied without restriction or conditions. Sometimes, however, ar