Dreaming of a Caliphate, Not!
Mahaguru58, a frequent contributor to Malaysiakini, believes that a “major reason why Muslims are suffering today in this world is because we have no Khalifah watching out over us.” To Mahaguru58, a Caliph to Muslims would be what the Pope is to Catholics.
I beg to differ.
The Pope is a religious leader. He has no power over the running of governments and non-Catholics. Whereas a Caliph exists in a Caliphate, and Sharia law would be the law of the land.
Dr Abdelwahab El-Affendi, author of Who Needs an Islamic State?, thinks that instead of calling for a Caliphate Muslims would be better off with an EU-style confederation of democratic Muslim states.
“I believe it may be necessary to work towards a more modest objective: the creation of a leading Muslim state. The function of such a state would be to play a role similar to that being played by the United States as a leader of the west. This is much less ambitious than a caliphate and falls well short of the building an EU-type union of Muslim states, but could lead to it eventually.”
No doubt, Dr Abdelwahab El-Affendi has been labeled a liberal Muslim, but to the non-Muslims, he is the kind of Muslim of whom they have nothing to fear.
The following is a video of a debate on “Who Needs an Islamic State?” between Dr Abdelwahab El-Affendi and Taji Mustafa from Hizb-ut Tahrir, two Muslims with divergent views. Watch it because you’ll find it instructive on what a Caliphate would be like, if the likes of Mahaguru58 and Taji Mustafa have their way.
Sphere: Related Content
The so-called debate didn’t really shed any new light. A better primer would be this site here:
http://www.caliphate.edu
sorry that should be caliphate.eu
Interesting website http://www.caliphate.eu
This Affendi chap is confused but i don’t expect anything else from these so called academics who sit in their university rooms, discuss with their peers, read a philosophy, apply a model then another model then use a framework and then give a new theory which is by now is disconnected from the reality which prompt them to do the research at the first place.
Caliphate today is not a dream but Muslims around the world are working to realize it
I hope they fail. I do not wish to see a Caliphate nor have any desire to live under an Islamic rule.
Saudi Arabia is an Islamic kingdom, and just how do they treat Christians? Here’s an example:
A Christian who was walking in the street in Jeddah was stopped by the Mutawa’ah [the Muslim Religious Police] and asked why he was not at the mosque for afternoon prayers. Upon replying that he was Christian, the Mutawi’ [policeman] cried out ‘A’udhu Billah’ [I seek Allah’s protection!] and spat on the Christian’s face.”
Is that how Christians will be treated in a Caliphate?
Puteri, that’s not going to happen in the future caliphate. We can’t extrapolate on what caliphate would be by looking at what had been done by Muslims today.
We are not pursuing to establish another Umayyad, Abbasid, nor Utmaniy. We are working to establish the caliphate based on Prophet’s method. In the times of Prophet Muhammad pbuh and the Companions, there is no such thing happened. In fact, during the liberation of Baitul Muqaddis, no Christian civilians were slaughtered for no reason. The opposite happened when the Crusaders sacked the city. We can’t say that these Crusaders represent the whole Christian believers, so does the Mutawa’ah who spat on the Christian’s face.
Ghazi,
We won’t know if that is going or not going to happen in a future caliphate, do we? If Muslims today can do what they are doing to non-Muslims, what is to stop them from doing worse esp if they are in “power” and the non-Muslims are just dhimmis?
I do not want to find myself worse off than I am today in a caliphate.
Dear Puteri,
Dhimmis have equal rights to the Muslims in the caliphate. They are not subject to discrimination, oppression, nor being labeled as second-class citizens. There will be no “special rights” to any race, no force-conversion. The non-Muslims can practice their beliefs without any suppression. Of course there will be big NO to excessive hedonism, vice, gambling, and public drinking. But I believe that there is no religion which advocates such things. Non-Muslims are allowed to drink alcohol and consume pork though, if they wanted to do so.
In the future caliphate (rightly-guided one), there will be Mahkamat Mazhallim (Court of Injustice), which will account the ruler and administrators for their wrongdoings. Even the Caliph himself can be held accountable. The judges of the court (Mahkamat Mazhallim) cannot be influenced by the executive power, not even the Caliph.
This mechanism will ensure that no transgression nor harm being done by the ruler to the people. Every citizen (Muslims and non-Muslims alike) have their rights to account the rulers, be it the caliph or the administrators. They can do so via this court of injustice. they can also voice out their opinions and dissatisfaction to the Majlis Ummat where their elected representatives meet and advice the caliph.
This is only part of the big picture of the caliphate that we are working so hard to establish.
If you need further discussion about the caliphate that we are struggling to establish, feel free to email me at buku.bug@gmail.com
Regards…
Ghazi,
I don’t need a caliphate to enjoy any of the “priviledges” you have listed here. I already have all the civil rights that I need presently.
What I have read in Bat Ye’or’s “The Dhimmi” is enlightening, and I cannot expect any future Caliphate to be much different from the previous one.
Are you sure that you have earned all the civil rights presently? If that’s true, then I’ll be the one who will defend the present system whole-heartedly… Have you ever wondered why there is a huge gap among the riches and poors? Have you ever heard of detention without trial? Have you ever seen enough of all the social illness that occur within the society?
Ever wonder why all these happened?
I haven’t read that book yet but I have read about it in the Wikipedia (for the time being). No wonder you are so negative about the caliphate. There are negative connotations throughout the articles.
Anyway, I will try to find the book and read about it first to understand what ‘dhimmitude’ really means from the perspective of a non-Muslim.
By the way, I noted that there is some misconception from the article.
“Often passing a Muslim on the wrong side would begin a beating that could leave a dhimmi mortally wounded. Since the dhimmis were denied the ability to testify against a Muslim, there was absolutely no recourse”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dhimmi:_Jews_and_Christians_Under_Islam
How can that be possible? As I mentioned before, even the Caliph himself (not only an ordinary Muslim citizen) can be held accountable (by Muslims and non-Muslims alike). How come the dhimmis were denied the ability to testify against a Muslim? Even if this had ever occured before, trust me, I can assure you, there’ll be no such thing in the future Caliphate. Because, like I had also mentioned before, we are not working to establish Umayyad, Abbasid, nor Uthmaniy caliphate. Instead, we are struggling for re-establishment of the caliphate based on the method of Prophet.
Regards…
Ghazi,
There is no utopia, and I do not believe there ever will be one even in a caliphate. As to the gaps between the rich and the poor, a lot of that has to do with poor governance. And guess where the poorest in the world live?
Misconception? You should read Bat Ye’or’s book, The Dhimmi, and while you are at it also read her book called Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide. She is a historian and her books are backed by numerous historical documents.
Why shouldn’t I be negative about the establishment of a Caliphate? The previous caliphate wasn’t that exemplary! Don’t try to white wash the realities faced by the dhimmis during the reigns of the caliphs!
If present day Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran discriminate against the non-Muslims, I don’t see how a Caliphate is going to be any different. Muslims will still be over-lording the non-Muslims.
Here’s a real example of how Muslims treated the Jews in Yemen - an edict promulgated in Yemen by Imam Yahya in 1905:
“In the name of Allah, the merciful and clement
This is the regulation which I ordain for all the Jews who must remain subjected to my laws and pay the [poll] tax without any change.
I recall to mind the ancient words and meaning; I recall to mind the obligations which the Turks have forgotten and which were observed in the time of the pious imams, before the triumph of people ignorant of the law.
The Jews can remain untroubled and be assured of their existence if they pay regularly the giyza.
Every male having reached the age of thirteen years is subject to this tax .. and by their life will be preserved under our domination.
No one can avoid paying this tax before the end of the year .. as it is written in the Qu’ran, the book received from Allah …
The Jews must not:
1. Raise their voices in front of Muslims,
2. Build houses higher than the houses of Muslims,
3. Brush against Muslims whilst passing them in the street,
4. Carry on the same trade as the Arabs,
5.Say that the Muslim law can have defect,
6. Insult the prophets,
7.Discuss religion with Muslims,
8. Ride animals astraddle,
9. Screw up their eyes in perceiving the nudity of Muslims,
10. Carry on their religious devotions outside their places of worship,
11. Raise their voices during prayers,
12. Sound the shofar with much noise,
13. Lend money at interest, which can bring about the destruction of the world,
14. They must always rise in front of Muslims and honour them in all circumstances. ”
[Quoted from The Myth of Islamic Tolerance:How Islamic Law Treats Non-Muslims page 121]
You still think Bat Ye’or was wrong? Under a misconception? Like I said, her book is backed up by historical documents.