Notes
- Anjum, O (2019, Oct 31), ‘Who Wants the Caliphate?’, Yaqeen Institute for Islamic Research.
- For his arguments, see Ghamidi J (2016, Feb 03), ‘Islam and the State: A Counter Narrative’, Australian Muslim Times; and Ghamidi J (2015, Mar 03), ‘Khilafah, Not a Religious Term’ (S Saleem, trans.), NewAgeIslam.
- Importantly, its being so does not mean that its usage is mandatory but that the term and, more importantly, its referent, is established in the Shari’ah.
- There is some distortion, perhaps unwitting, that serves this reinterpretation. Abu Bakr (ra) is quoted by Ghamidi as cautioning people, ‘that a state can only have one ruler’, yet the report he cites from al-Bayhaqi’s al-Sunan al-Kubrā (no. 16550) makes no mention of any ‘state’. Rather it quotes Abu Bakr as saying, ‘It is not permitted that the Muslims have two leaders…’ [lā yahillu an yakūna lil-muslimīna amīrān], which clearly refers to all Muslims as benefitted by the definite article of genus [lām al-jins] prefixed to ‘Muslims’. Notably, in this report Abu Bakr (ra) goes on the explain the reason why two or more rulers are not allowed: this would lead to division, discord and tribulations among Muslims. Evidently, allowing a multiplicity of sovereign states does just that.
- For an articulation of his views, see Nadwi, A (2017, Sep 10), ‘Should Muslims Establish the Khilafah’ [Video], YouTube; and Nadwi, A (2020, Jul 22),’ Ask Shaykh YQ Special with Dr. Akram Nadwi’, YouTube, 23.10-29.30.
- For Sh. Hatem al-Haj’s recent articulations on this topic, see here and here. Relatedly, Hamza Yusuf also finds secularity to be compatible with Islam, as he indicates here.
- Asad T, Formations of the Secular, Stanford University Press, 2003, and Mahmood S, Religious Difference in a Secular Age, Princeton University Press, 2016.
Last modified: April 13, 2022
Jazakallah
Beautifully written… Your writing reminds me of the challenge Islamic activists face – the lack of appreciation for nuance and subtle detail. May Allah (swt) reward you for this initiative.
Excellent and very well articulated, jazakallah
Ma sha Allah! Very well written article about challenges facing Ummah from contemporary scholarship about core Islamic obligation of re-establishing Caliphate.
Dear brother Uthman,
Is it typical for academic articles to use YouTube videos for referencing? Cut and paste videos and Facebook posts to represent a scholars view on such a huge topic seems unfair and not entirely accurate. This is a topic with a range of views on the spectrum. People are not simply for or against. A small video does not capture the respective scholars’ views thoroughly and often it’s the writer missing the forest for the tree when trying to box in a scholar.
HY for example also says “ I would want that the rulers of the Muslim World, especially if you have very large populations of Muslims, that they recognize the authority of Islam in the state, especially for those things that directly affect people. The single most important aspect of the sharia after personal law of marriage and things like that are the commercial laws. If you look at all Islamic books on Islamic law, the vast majority of them relate to commercial law. And those commercial laws, if they were implemented today, we would have far more just societies, because much of it is the prohibition of these commercial transactions that exploit people. So, I think there is definitely a role for commercial law. In terms of the penal codes of Islam, most of them are at the discretion of the judge”
The video reference doesn’t captures these sentiments. I could provide many more quotes and articles which further demonstrate HY’s views are more nuanced than you present but I am not the academic.
Sincerely
Dear Anonymous,
The quotes you mentioned about HY merely encourage, not obligate the establishment of an Islamic law. I don’t think brother Uthman disagrees that given a choice between a comprehensive Islamic government and a complete secular government, HY would choose the former. The contention is one of obligation.
Brother Ibn Ahmed
The point I was trying to make was a bit broader, perhaps not expressed well.
If these articles are intended for an ivory tower echo chamber then its fine, if it’s for a broader audience as some of the other articles suggest, then it’s divisive. The scholars mentioned have students in the thousands. When they are painted as secularists (which is not really fair, prefer Vs obligate isn’t enough to categorise a scholar as a secularist), the students will take affront to these descriptions.
I have followed all three of these scholars, and it has never occurred to me that they want anything other than good for the ummah, or that their end goal is any different to brother Uthman’s. Even as Sheikh Akram Nadwi says that the current best thing is for a secular system, it is clear that his ultimate goal is for an Islamic system, but in his assessment the ummah is at the education stage and trying to jump start further ahead may lead to another ISIS style caliphate. Perhaps I am viewing these scholars with very different lenses, but it feels as though the author is cherry picking and not listening to the scholars with his heart. 1 billion Muslims are not going to agree on the minutia of semantics. Isn’t some diversity healthy? These 3 scholars simply have different paths to getting to the same end game.
HY is the Western Muslims’ latest punching bag, and anyone who defends him also falls into the sell out category. This all seems very much to go against the essence of establishing khilafa. I would’ve thought uniting on common ground would be a better start?
I’d like to share the following video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXyIt0h-txU ) I found interesting and has nothing specifically to do with a Caliphate. Cynics will say, oh yes HY at another politician’s door, but if one can try to think the best of a fellow Muslim, it might appear that HY et al are already working for a khilafa and always have been, but not as the ‘movements’ would like them to. When scholars (numerous others have collaborated with the PM’s Al Qadir university) and Muslim rulers can collaborate on positive common ground, it is a sign of hope.
The articles on this site have made for interesting reads, and since enough accolades from the ‘yes men’ have already been made, I hope this alternative reading is taken with an impartial stance and not with offence which was not intended.
The spread of Islam under the Prophet saw was slow until the battles after Medina and the conquest of Makkah.
The “caliphate” of the Prophet was ensured by the implementation of the Shariah and rule of law supported by legal force.
Muslims have to be able to follow this sunnah with unity at all levels being the first priority.