ISIS declares ‘caliphate’

[Alienoz_TR]

Sunnis accepted the Ottoman Turks as Caliphs so no.

Nope. They did not. South Asians during British Rule may have looked up to Ottoman Caliph, but Arabs in general only accepted him as ruler as long as he had power.

Those who are stranger to Ottoman history may not know that Egyptian revolts, Druze revolts, or Wahhab's rise in Arabia.

Ottomans took the title Caliph from Circassians, its legitimacy has been questioned by Arabs often.

 

[FaujHistorian]

....
Only Abu Bakr RA, Usman RA, and Ali RA were elected the rest were either selected or passed down from their father like a monarchy.

Please do not spread untruths. What you are implying in 2014, is totally incorrect.

No Khalifa was ever "elected" in modern sense.

They all were "strong armed" men who got to rule. At best (if we ignore all the fiascos) they were benevolent dictators from 2014 POV.

Let's not make them more holy than they were.

Thank you.

Excellent opportunity for Muslims all over the world to get united by rallying behind a great caliph.It seems Muslims are going to have their lost glory back under the leadership of this great god chosen calipha.

you cannot sow the seeds for agave plant and hope you will get apples.

There is munafirat and munafiqat at the very core of modern day Khilafah system.

Please do not get pushed around by fakery.


happy Ramazan

 

[rockstar08]

yeah and now he can rule the toilets of iraq and syria

this is the first caliph i see who is so scared to come out in public

 

[Multani]

This is what we'll get when we pollute our religion by mixing in it the cr@p of the government and politics.

Mullah cracy is the worst form of government. It doesn't matter if a Mullah is Sunni or Shia. doesn't matter.

1400 years ago, the prevalent government systems used to combine religion and government.

Rome had "Son of God" ruler
Egyptians tried it too
And so did Arabs, and Persians.

Khalifa is nothing but self declared "hand of God" may be right hand may be left.

But that just a way to add legitimacy to the rule of man.


Not any more.

for the last 400 years or so

we as people have grown up.

We do not believe earth is flat
or wolf eats moon during eclipse
or God appoints a bearded Mullah as a ruler anymore

not anymore

government now must be a distributed system divided between judiciary, executive, and legislature

and at multiple levels. Federal, state and local.


No more Khalifas, and sons of gods, or divinely anointed appointed self declared dictators.

No more!

Brother, Imam Mahdi AS will be the Khalifa once he appears. This is part of Muslim belief.

And the beard is the Sunnah of the Prophet AS. To insult it is against Islam.

Until then, the system of government you propose is not at all contradictory with Islamic principles, and is excellent.

Please do not spread untruths. What you are implying in 2014, is totally incorrect.

No Khalifa was ever "elected" in modern sense.

They all were "strong armed" men who got to rule. At best (if we ignore all the fiascos) they were benevolent dictators from 2014 POV.

Let's not make them more holy than they were.

Thank you.



you cannot sow the seeds for agave plant and hope you will get apples.

There is munafirat and munafiqat at the very core of modern day Khilafah system.

Please do not get pushed around by fakery.


happy Ramazan

Brother, there is no modern day khilafa system. There is no such thing.

A Khalifa is elected by consensus. It is part of Islamic Jurisprudence. The process is very clearly documented.

 

[KingMamba]

Nope. They did not. South Asians during British Rule may have looked up to Ottoman Caliph, but Arabs in general only accepted him as ruler as long as he had power.

Those who are stranger to Ottoman history may not know that Egyptian revolts, Druze revolts, or Wahhab's rise in Arabia.

Ottomans took the title Caliph from Circassians, its legitimacy has been questioned by Arabs often.

Arabs accepted Turks as Khalifa up until the revolt, before that they did not say anything but the British who instigated the Arab revolt were the first ones who challenged the legitimacy of the Ottoman Caliphate because they were scared of Muslim uprisings in their empire. Only today some Arabs will be like Turks betrayed them by taking the caliphate from them but the majority do not say such things. Remember the last Khalifa of Islam was given burial in Medina by the Saudi government because of the fact that he commanded respect amongst the Sunnis.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Brother, Imam Mahdi AS will be the Khalifa once he appears. This is part of Muslim belief.

And the beard is the Sunnah of the Prophet AS. To insult it is against Islam.

Until then, the system of government you propose is not at all contradictory with Islamic principles, and is excellent.



Brother, there is no modern day khilafa system. There is no such thing.

A Khalifa is elected by consensus. It is part of Islamic Jurisprudence. The process is very clearly documented.

I respect your right to believe in whatever you want to believe.

FYi Imam Mehdi concept is a Christian (what they got from pagans) concept of living God and resurrection.

Pakistanis just believe in this false theory without ever asking them a simple question.

"should we not strive for truth and justice and tolerance" NOW?

without waiting for some false God or falsely appointed Mullah?

Please do not think this is attack on you.

Ask questions.

Never take things for granted even if a Mullah or a parent says it is religiously ordained concept.

Never!


Happy Ramazan

 

[KingMamba]

Please do not spread untruths. What you are implying in 2014, is totally incorrect.

No Khalifa was ever "elected" in modern sense.

They all were "strong armed" men who got to rule. At best (if we ignore all the fiascos) they were benevolent dictators from 2014 POV.

Let's not make them more holy than they were.

Thank you.

You are back again eh, by modern sense if you mean elections by the whole community yes they were not elected in that sense but they were elected by a Majlis of top Companions, that was the best that was around at the time and the people accepted that. It can be considered as early form of representative democracy but it is obviously different to what we have today. The first five Caliphs are considered Khalifa Rashidun if you disagree with that then you are either Shia or a non Muslim. Considering you bunched Ali RA in there as well I am guessing you are the latter and will disregard your statement.

 

[FaujHistorian]

yeah and now he can rule the toilets of iraq and syria

this is the first caliph i see who is so scared to come out in public

They are just TTP of Arab lands.

Gangsters in a lawless land.

That's all.

They are using Khilafah name to attract blind followers

just like TTP gangsta did to fool so many of us for so long.

 

[Multani]

Anyone who denies the existence of Imam Mahdi AS is not considered a Muslim. This is because the belief is proven by Mutawatir hadith.

The only person who denies Imam Mahdi AS officially in Pakistan is Javed Ghamdi of the farahi school. His followers in LUMS and other places do the same.

 

[Alienoz_TR]

Arabs accepted Turks as Khalifa up until the revolt, before that they did not say anything but the British who instigated the Arab revolt were the first ones who challenged the legitimacy of the Ottoman Caliphate because they were scared of Muslim uprisings in their empire. Only today some Arabs will be like Turks betrayed them by taking the caliphate from them but the majority do not say such things. Remember the last Khalifa of Islam was given burial in Medina by the Saudi government because of the fact that he commanded respect amongst the Sunnis.

I am not talking about Arab revolt of 1910's.

Yemen and Arabia were always hostile. Ottoman-Yemenese wars date back to 17th century
Ottoman-Saudi wars date back to 18th century.
And 19th century Egyptian revolt crushed Ottomans, gaining defacto independence from the Empire.
Following them Druze revolts shaked the empire with ongoing Armenian revolts durin early 20th century.

Ottoman Caliph was no authority over his empire, let alone over whole Muslim world. That sick mentality shed Turkish blood anywhere from the gates of Vienna to the deserts of Arabia.

 

[FaujHistorian]

You are back again eh, by modern sense if you mean elections by the whole community yes they were not elected in that sense but they were elected by a Majlis of top Companions, that was the best that was around at the time and the people accepted that. It can be considered as early form of representative democracy but it is obviously different to what we have today. The first five Caliphs are considered Khalifa Rashidun if you disagree with that then you are either Shia or a non Muslim. Considering you bunched Ali RA in there as well I am guessing you are the latter and will disregard your statement.

Abu bakr ra was not elected. he was strong armed with the help of Umer ra.

Read Shibli Nomani's excellent book "Alfarooq".

Thank you

 

[rockstar08]

They are just TTP of Arab lands.

Gangsters in a lawless land.

That's all.

They are using Khilafah name to attract blind followers

just like TTP gangsta did to fool so many of us for so long.

i know , and i am sure he will soon find lots of armed , but blinded muslims who will think he is caliph ,

 

[FaujHistorian]

Anyone who denies the existence of Imam Mahdi AS is not considered a Muslim. This is because the belief is proven by Mutawatir hadith.

The only person who denies Imam Mahdi AS officially in Pakistan is Javed Ghamdi of the farahi school. His followers in LUMS and other places do the same.

"existence"?

Can you point out on the world map where Mehdi "exists".

Thank you

 

[Multani]

"existence"?

Can you point out on the world map where Mehdi "exists".

Thank you

I think you are a follower of Javed Ghamdi, who denies Imam Mahdi AS

 

[KingMamba]

I am not talking about Arab revolt of 1910's.

Yemen and Arabia were always hostile. Ottoman-Yemenese wars date back to 17th century
Ottoman-Saudi wars date back to 18th century.
And 19th century Egyptian revolt crushed Ottomans, gaining defacto independence from the Empire.
Following them Druze revolts shaked the empire with ongoing Armenian revolts durin early 20th century.

Ottoman Caliph was no authority over his empire, let alone over whole Muslim world. That sick mentality shed Turkish blood anywhere from the gates of Vienna to the deserts of Arabia.

Yemen had their own Zaidi Imams and that is why they did not accept Ottoman Caliphate. As for Arabia until the Wahabbi movement came about all the I guess you can call it emirates that made up the peninsula swore fealty to Istanbul. Sure there was resentment amongst the ruling classes but the vast majority of people (Sunnis) did accept Ottomans as Khalifa. About the Egyptian revolt yes it crushed the Ottomans but all empires eventually fall that had little to do with the Caliphate. Even thought Egyptians were basically independent they still swore token fealty to the Caliph (kind of like how the Abbasids were considered Caliph yet they were not really in charge in most regions). I don't see how Druze and Armenians matter in the case of the Caliphate as they are non Muslim groups, I think you are blurring the lines between Caliphate and empire which is understandable. Most westerners hear caliphate and the first thing that comes to their mind is Jannisaries marching on Europe LOL.