Has the Caliphate been re-established by ISIS?

raqqa[Short answer: No…]

Yesterday, the group that has swept to mass media attention in the last month, ISIS, claimed that the Caliphate has been restored in its ‘domains’, and called for Muslims to render their pledge of allegiance (bay’ah) to Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, changing its name to simply ‘Islamic State’ (I.S).

While most Muslims would be jubilant at the claim of the return of the Khilafah (Caliphate), which is a vital obligation upon Muslims that has been conspicuously missing for so long, a self-proclamation does not a Caliphate make.

We’ve been here before – many times. The short-lived war-born ‘Islamic States’ of Chechnya, Somalia, Mali, Makkah under the short take over of the ‘Mahdi’ Qahtani and  Taliban Afghanistan, had each a ruling fighting group that declared their leader ‘Amir’ or ‘Amir ul Momineen’ (including Abu Bakr al Baghdadi’s predecessor,  and former ISIS leader, Abu Abdullah Rashid al Baghdadi) and all of them have met with the same fate: invasion, uprising and destruction of their fledgling state or area of operations, not to mention their resorting to unIslamic laws, policies and practices while they were in power. Knowing this cycle, we should be especially cautious when the phenomena of an armed militia group declaring an Islamic State arises again. This is not to say that sincere people do not follow those groups, or that all of those groups didn’t have noble intentions, but the matter is one of assessing their validity, viability and truth. So considering such history, and that many of these groups tried to claim their leader was the Amir ul Momineen in order to consolidate their power and attract new supporters, are ISIS not doing the same? Has the Caliphate actually been restored under ISIS?

It is said that Abu Bakr al Baghdadi is of Quraysh descent, and this must validate his claim to Caliphate. While many classical scholars have spoken about the desirability of a candidate of Qurayshi descent to be the leader, it is neither agreed to be an obligation, nor does it matter even if the candidate was. Many Muslims are of Qurayshi descent – including the (now deceased) ‘Mahdi’ of Makkah Mohammed Abdullah al-Qahtani. Being the Caliph also requires the candidate to be just and competent, something we must not forget. Regardless of the qualifications of the individual, however, it is whether or not any prospective Caliph actually has a Caliphate or not to rule over, that will determine whether he is the Caliph in the first place.

A brief note on invalid reasons to reject a claim of Islamic State

Some Muslims may consider a group’s fiqh (jurisprudence) and interpretations of Islam as being not in line with the interpretations of their own school of thought. This is not a correct basis from which to reject a group’s work for a common obligation i.e. Khilafah (Caliphate). Those who reject a group or movement merely because they follow a different school of thought, should remember that Islam permits difference of opinion. To reject something as outside the fold of Islam, due to it being a different school of thought to one’s own, makes one a purveyor of disunity amongst Muslims (when those opinions are validly derived from Islamic texts). This does not mean that Muslims must not intellectually discuss, debate and challenge each other’s opinions – but to call a valid Islamic opinion, unIslamic, is intolerant and in breach of the Prophet’s (saaw) commands to unity. He (saaw) even informed us that the judge who derives a mistaken Islamic opinion still gets reward (despite it being mistaken – and therefore not the true Islamic opinion). In the end, Allah (swt) alone knows what is the correct opinions with the area of legitimate difference of opinion, and it is best left to Him (swt) to resolve disputes on the day of judgement. An Islamic state is valid and correct, even if it is based upon Hanbali fiqh, Hanafi figh or even Dhahiri fiqh from the (now mostly forgotten) school of Ibn Hazm al Andalusi! The question is, however, are I.S. even following a school of thought in many of their excessive actions? This shall be answered below.

Some may object that they find a group or state’s understanding of Islam uncompromising, austere and even arduous. However, it should be remembered that, sometimes throughout history, the toughest and hardest Muslims have come from harsh conditions that, after giving rise to a basic and austere understanding of Islam, also produced very capable warriors that slowed down, reversed and even saved the Muslims from defeat many times. One such case is Al Murabitun of North Africa, who rose from the Berber tribes and conquered an area of land from West Africa to central Spain, led by Yusuf bin Tashfin.

The highly cultured, but divided, bickering and weak Muslim city states of Al Andalus (Portugal/Spain) were being conquered piecemeal by Crusaders. Their armies were too weak and softened to fight pitched battles against the Spanish Christian Crusader states to the north. Muslims lost battle after battle, until Yusuf bin Tashfin marched his armies into Al Andalus and scored victory after victory upon the terrified Crusader armies. Even a heavy cavalry charge by the Knight orders couldn’t dent the Al Murabitun battle lines! Yusuf bin Tashfin was originally invited by the Amirs of the Muslim city-states, but he was so appalled at their pathetically weak and lax attitude to some unIslamic practices (like wine drinking and corruption) he deposed them all and took control. Interestingly, Yusuf didn’t declare himself Caliph, but only Amir. He sent a letter to the Caliph in Baghdad giving him his pledge of allegiance, and declaring his newly conquered territories to return to being wilayahs (districts) of the greater Caliphate.

almovarid

Of course the Al Murabitun had strange Islamic opinions, like wearing the Litham (face veil for men) because they believed that the mouth was unclean (presumably based upon a very different understanding of the hadith that the Muslim should guard their tongues and their private parts). The Al Murabitun also had opinions that would be recognised today, like the prohibition of images and statues – which led them to destroy a number of artworks and carvings in Al Andalus. However, these issues aside, and putting aside the unIslamic actions that are recorded some of them committed in their duties, that their wilayah was Islamic (ruled by Islamic law) is beyond question, and was accepted by the Caliph of Baghdad and the scholars of Al Andalus, at the time.

Even if a group or movement holds opinions that are against one’s own opinions, unity allows us to collectively benefit from their works, and while united, nothing says Muslims cannot then engage in intellectual debate to persuade them to change their ideas through intellectual discussion. This way we remain united, but help each other to improve and refine our ideas. As the famous classical scholar Ibn Khaldun points out in his book ‘An Introduction to History’, many great states were started by nomads, and became powerful intellectual and cultural centres of power.

Another reason that can’t be used to reject a claim of Islamic State, is the method used to create it, whether it was done by coup, revolution or elections. Despite some of those methods being illegitimate, once the Islamic State is created and fulfills all the criteria, it is accepted on the basis of its factual description. However, that being the case, we would expect Allah (swt) to only grant victory to the group that best emulates the Prophet’s (saaw) method of achieving the Islamic State. This is why the Prophet’s (saaw) method is important to study, as following his method is the basis for the actions of a Muslim in discharging their obligations.

The Pre-requisite for Islamic State

The question we must ask ourselves is, what is the prerequisite for an Islamic state? Without needing to go into formal fiqh, we can agree that there should be at least two basic and self-evident requirements: 1) Islam being the only basis, purpose and objective for law and policy in governance over the state, and 2) the existence of a state.

Ruling a State by Islam

A state (or ‘Dawlah’ in classic Arabic) is basically a community under government. This requires the existence of a community, in this, the Ummah, and a government over them. In Secular theory, modern communities are defined by ‘nations’ of common race, culture and language. Modern state theory has now been overrun by the secular concept of the ‘nation state’ with states being purposed to be the political expression of the ‘collective will’ of their constituent ‘nation’. Unfortunately, this is also the cause of ethnic and racial conflict, and states with more than one ‘nation’ tend to face internal conflict, persecution and oppression as to which nation’s expression leads and directs the state. For this reason even seemly peaceful nations like Belgium, Canada and Spain have very serious problems with population separatism, merely for differences in language!

An Islamic state can only be Islamic if the community it ‘expresses’ is defined purely by their Islamic belief, not language, race and culture. To fulfil this particular Islamic criterion of the character of an Islamic State, I.S. are claiming they’re not expressing only one race or ethnic group, but portray themselves as ignoring such arbitrary concerns, and attempt to present themselves exclusively as representing an Islamic affiliation. In attempting to fulfil Islam’s (universal humanitarian) disregard for Nationalism, I.S. have used slogans, declarations and redrawn maps to portray themselves as destroying the region’s nationalist mentality that was created by the colonial sykes-picot border, and thereby claim a moral victory over the artificial borders that were designed to separate and divide the Muslim world, and enhance their claim of ‘Islamic State’ to the Muslim world.

However, while it is true that I.S. currently ‘rule’ over active war zones, this does not exempt them from adhering to the Islamic rules of war, and protection of civilians. In this I.S. have adopted patently unIslamic practices and strategies, like blowing up civilians in market places (e.g. Baghdad), kidnapping of innocents for ransom, and execution of those from other Islamic groups who voice criticism and political dissent (this is not only practiced by ISIS. There was the case of two British Muslims who went to Somalia to fight, and were killed because they complained at the tactics of one branch of al Shabab). If I.S. committed these crimes, but had disavowed their use, then whilst that would still be inexcusable, at least they would have admitted their wrongdoing against Islamic commandments/distanced their actions from Islamic commandments. However, the justification of targeting civilians IS KUFR (disbelief), and a borrowed concept from Western warfare.

Furthermore, I.S. should not target, declare war on, or kill Shia civilians, even if they consider them to be non-Muslims. This is because non-Muslims are also protected under Islamic law, and even if Shia are considered non-Muslims, then Shia shrines should be protected like Islam obliges Muslims to protect Churches and Synagogues. So we should ask I.S. to DECIDE, either Shias are Muslims that can’t be killed, OR Shias are non-Muslims that STILL can’t be killed or molested. The choice is theirs – there is no middle ground, except for those looking for excuses to kill those they hate.

‘and let not hatred of others make you depart from justice’ [Quran]

It is I.S’s JUSTIFICATION of their practices that are against the Islamic rules in warfare and treatment of civilians, that alone, immediately renders false any claim to being Islamic. If I.S. is sincere, they should renounce terrorism and renounce their declaring war on all Shias indiscriminately, in order to at least render themselves compliant with basic Islamic requirements. 

Of course there are further problems with I.S’s lack of mercy, vigilante application of Islamic law, lack of Islamic due process and ‘innocent till proven guilty’ considerations for adjudicating cases. However, these allegations against them, while numerous, are difficult to ascertain given the unclear reports and political agenda of external media propaganda. In the presence of unclear and conflicting reports, all that can be said for certain is that if these reports are wrong, I.S. should take care to portray themselves as fair, objective and merciful (which are Islamic requirements). Their gleeful broadcasting of harsh rhetoric and gruesome images of mass executions would lead most people to believe the more negative reports against them are true. If this is not the case, then I.S. should immediate dismiss their spokesman Adnani as their PR manager.

It should be remembered that the Prophet (saaw) found any way he could to not punish people according to corporal and capital punishment. He (saaw) advised Muslims to find excuses and ‘loopholes’ to let people off punishment. He (saaw) was even reported to have said that the reason he hasn’t executed the sedition and treasonous agitators (i.e. ‘the hypocrites’) amongst the Muslim community despite Allah (swt) having revealed to him who they were, is because he feared people outside would say he ‘kills his companions’ (i.e. kills people for no reason) – since people wouldn’t know the reasons or have proof for their executions. The Prophet (saaw) set an example to us for this – even people who commit war, treason and sedition can’t be punished unless their is clear proof to the entire community, lest people think Muslims merely punish people wantonly or for personal reasons.

I.S. should let the wisdom and mercy of the Prophet (saaw) guide their actions. The Prophet (saaw) after conquering Makkah, delayed demolishing and moving the Kaabaa on to its original abrahamic foundations, because the people weren’t ready developed enough in their newly embraced religion, to accept it, despite it being an obligation. If only I.S. learned from this, and refrained from destroying (Sunni and Shia) Saint shrines, they would win more people to their side. If I.S. possesses the stronger intellectual position ,they should attempt instead to persuade Muslims of their position using reasoned argument, not the bulldozer or dynamite. Sometimes the carrot is better than the stick.

Security – the basis for Statehood

Apart from a community, a state requires a government. The ability to govern depends on the provision of security and the enforceability of law and order over a community.What makes a government viable is its ability to provide security – without that, it becomes a failed government, and hence a ‘failed state’.

I.S. is currently unable to provide a viable, stable law and order and security in the territories it operates under. In Iraq, I.S. must share power with other Muslim groups just to hold down the cities of Mosul and Tikrit. In Syria, I.S. share the north of Syria with other Muslim groups of whom they fight and bicker with, and have exchanged pieces of land incessantly, with their Syrian capital of Raqqa itself being taken and retaken between them. I.S. clearly does not have a monopoly on power to control the territories let alone the ability to describe themselves as a viable government over them.

The leader of I.S. Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, like ‘Ameer ul Mumineen’ Mullah Omar does not even have the security to make public appearances. If the leader cannot even have the security to make public appearances in their own ‘state’, then how can they be said to be able to be in control of it?

Security against external threats

Some Muslims have argued superficially, that because victory and success are from God, it ‘therefore’ does not matter how apparently weak a group is, if it is ‘righteous it shall be victorious’. Putting the assessment of I.S’s ‘righteousness’ aside, let us consider this carefully. If a man established shariah in his own home, estate or ‘ranch’, performing legal punishments, and having armed himself, would it be reasonable for people to conclude that he had established a state? No of course not. Why? Because his state would last only for as long as the time it took for the police to arrive.

A State, in order to fulfill the requirement of being a state, and not a mere outlaw zone, must be able to effectively protect itself to a sufficient degree from other states. If these other states choose to attack with conventional forces, the state could put up effective resistance. Of course even a superpower can be invaded and lose wars, but if the only thing that keeps an area of land from successful invasion is merely the enemy’s discretion and mood, than the ‘State’s’ control of that land is illusory at best. What’s the difference between a client state (like Hawaii, Puerto Rico or Crimea) and a state that can’t stand up to conventional warfare? The answer is, there is no difference, since if they both irk more powerful States that can project power over that area, they would be swept away in as little time it took for the enemy States to mobilise and arrive for battle.

It could be argued that I.S. have effectively repelled conventional attack from the Iraqi Army. However, this is not an example of a resisting a State power, but rather resisting a client State. Iraq’s Army has not been effectively rebuilt and cannot fight a conventional war, its morale is low, it is poorly trained, and ultimately depends upon the U.S. Army.

The Prophet Muhammed (saaw) when he was seeking the support of military power and protection for the Deen (way of life) of Islam, approached various tribes to believe in Islam and pledge allegiance to him as leader, and to the cause of Islam. One of his encounters was with Shayban bin Thalaba and is tribe, who accepted the Prophet (saaw)’s offer, but indicate they were vulnerable and strategically exposed to the Persian empire, and couldn’t provide protection from them. The Prophet (saaw) didn’t take them up on their offer of support, for the beginning base for the Islamic State must be strategically defensible from all sides.

‘We would be reneging on a pact that Khusrau has placed upon us to the effect that we would not cause an incident and not give sanctuary to a troublemaker. This policy you suggest for us is such a one that kings would dislike. As for those areas bordering Arab lands, the blame of those so acting would be forgiven and excuses for them be accepted, but for those areas next to Persia, those so acting would not be forgiven and no such excuses would be accepted. If you want us to help and protect you from whatever relates to Arab territories alone, we should do so.’ The Messenger of God(SAAS) replied, ‘Your reply is in no way bad, for you have spoken eloquently and truthfully. (But) God’s religion can only be engaged in by those who encompass it from all sides.’“

[Abu Nu’aym, Al-Hakim and Al-Bayhaqi]

The difference between Emirate and Caliphate

If I.S. wanted to claim a state, even if we ignore all the considerations we discussed, the best that I.S. could say is that they are merely an Islamic Emirate (a leadership of a local area). This has been allowed by Islamic Scholars in the past, who had to give reluctant rulings on a divided and fractured Ummah for over 1,000 years. They ordered that Muslims who are ruled over by local leaders, may obey them (as long as the laws were Islamic – which precludes virtually all current Muslim states), until a powerful leader arose and re-united the Muslim territories by conquest. This indeed was how the turkish Osmanli tribe rose to power until it became powerful enough to control the centres of power of the Ummah, and therefore declare themselves the Caliphate (i.e. Uthmani Khilafah or ‘Ottomans’). I.S. are far from ruling over the main centres of power in the Muslim World, and so cannot call themselves a Caliphate. 

For the reasons mentioned above, I.S. is not a State, if they were they would not be recognisably Islamic when compared to the mercy and wisdom of the Prophet’s (saaw) example. Lastly, they are not a Caliphate as their ‘areas’ are too small, vulnerable and unstrategic within the Muslim world to claim leadership of it.

A note to those concerned regarding Western opinion

Some Muslims are concerned that I.S. actions send the wrong message about Islam to the  Western audience. In this, they are correct. However, it is wrong for Muslims to permit the West to have a higher moral ground, or judgment upon I.S. or Muslims. The simple reason is if I.S. do create a state using terrorism and brutal actions – it wouldn’t be any different to how many Western nations were formed and rose to power.

France arose out of a bloody reign of terror (from which the word ‘terrorism’ was first created – i.e. ruling by terror), to match I.S’s publication of gruesome execution images, ‘enlightenment’ france invented the guillotine for public and frequent execution.

The U.S.A arose from the actions of what would certainly be called terrorism and insurgency against the British empire – they even destroyed and wiped out entire pro-British civilian towns (in now modern day Canada), not to mention their bloody genocide against the native Americans. To this day, U.S.A has anti-cuba terror training camps in Florida, where their harbour Luis Posada Carriles, who blew up a cuba civilian plane. The U.S. has refused to extradite him to South American governments who want him on terrorism charges.

Britain had a number of bloody civil wars, but the true horror of the activities they undertook to raise their state into an international empire are too numerous to be written in this piece. Suffice to say, Winston Churchill was voted in a poll as the ‘best briton of all time’, despite inventing the idea of ‘strategic bombing’ (mass bombing of civilian cities – yes, he and not Hitler did it first!), and he advocated that civilians be bombed to ‘spread a lively terror’ – what do you call someone who bombs civilians to spread terror amongst them? (answers on a postcard).

The Israeli government was infamously fought for and formed by confirmed terrorist groups the Haganah and the Stern gang, who pioneered terror bombings against civilians targets like hotels and cruise ships.

Even the innocuous ANC in South Africa who fought against racist apartheid South African government used terror tactics of blowing up shopping malls, restaurants and cafes with civilians, to make their point. They even fought and killed rival groups in ways not too dissimilar to I.S. Yet all these groups, individuals and causes are praised, and (minus the ugly facts of course) commemorated. It is argued that although modern Westerners may condemn these actions, they are explained away as either ‘the result of a terrible time’, or ‘unfortunate, but necessary at the time’.

The only argument any Western media pundit, politician or Western-learning Muslim, who hold any praise for the individuals or groups who did ‘what was necessary’ could ever say against I.S. is that I.S. are fighting for the wrong cause (which is portrayed as ‘Islam’). Of course, it always has been the case in Western history and foreign policy, that as long as a group fights for ‘freedom’, little regard is paid to the tactics. Our response is, I.S. are no different to the history of some Western armies, Western covert-backed groups and even some of the ‘founding fathers’ of Western nations – therefore they certainly have no basis to judge I.S.  – I.S’s crimes come from being a good student of the West, right down to their corporate structure and organisation and ability to use social media!

The Muslim response to Western media regarding I.S. is that Islam condemns ISIS as it considers that both the cause and the tactics must be correct, and Islam unreservedly condemns terrorism and the targeting of civilians. However, we should also explain to them that I.S. are the product of a reaction to Western foreign policy in the region that arose out of the actions of the U.S, UK and their puppets in the region. 

If the Muslim world is left alone, this will give Muslims the peace, space and time to unify and intellectually evolve into a refined civilisation that future generations can live in. Muslims do not want any ‘intervention’ from the outside powers which caused all these problems in the first place. The continuing use of violence, intimidation and persecution by Western powers (and their puppets) to prevent the cause of Muslim independence and self-directed political destiny, has produced the kind of extreme reactions we currently witness in the Muslim world.

To read more about the background of ISIS and the situation of Iraq after the fall of Mosul, read my piece ‘ISIS: Storm or Pawn?’

 



Categories: ARTICLES, Muslim Debate Initiative, Muslim World / Middle East, Revival Thought (Al Nahda), The Muslim Debate Initiative, Zara Faris

Tags: , , , , ,

37 replies

  1. “Another reason that can’t be used to reject a claim of Islamic State, is the method used to create it, whether it was done by coup, revolution or elections. Despite some of those methods being illegitimate, once the Islamic State is created and fulfills all the criteria, it is accepted on the basis of its factual description.”

    This is a clear justification of terrorism. ISIS are Takfirists who murder other Muslims. Shame on you.

    • No its not clear, nor is it a justification of terrorism. Please read the full article.

      • Perhaps you should have added that those who employed illegitimate means should be taken to account when stability is attained? For example, if Sisi now sees sense and starts working for the well-being of Egypt and even for the caliphate, will he be absolved of the crimes he has already committed (in the courts of this life, of course)?

    • Assalamu alaykum,

      Maybe it helps if it is explained like this…

      ===[ Causality and Ethics ]===

      — Regarding the founding of States —

      People are judged for their actions including the intentions.
      However ‘events’ are judged on their effects.

      For example:
      Zina (adultery) is an evil act.
      The one committing zina has committed a sin.
      However if a child is born from zina,
      the child is not to be blamed for the act.
      It certainly does not deserve to be killed for the zina of the parents.

      Similarly

      A state may be founded by criminal means
      and Allah will judge those criminals for it.
      But if the state is running with justice, do not throw it away.

      That would be punishing the future generations for the sins of the earlier generations;
      which would be injustice upon injustice.

      — Regarding the Causality and Ethics in General —

      Causality certainly exists.
      But if truth was easy, would anyone be ignorant of it?

      ~

      Some Muslims are conflicted because they feel, taking knowledge and technology from the disbelievers killing the Muslims is like supporting those countries (like the USA). Because if those countries would not exists the technology they are using would not have existed.

      [2:32] http://quran.com/2/32
      They said, “Exalted are You; we have no knowledge except what You have taught us. Indeed, it is You who is the Knowing, the Wise.”

      Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2687 http://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/41/43
      Sunan Ibn Majah http://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/41/43
      (daif)
      It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:
      “A wise word is the lost property of the believer, so wherever he finds it, he has more right to it.”

      Thus know that Allah is the source of good and of all knowledge.
      And if something is good use it; even if its past appears not to be.

      For know that even liars speak truth occasionally.
      And gold is refined from dirt.

      And this can be applied to everything in reality. Not only knowledge.
      For example regarding marriage…
      Although her past may indicate,
      a woman wishes for a man who does not judge her past,
      but brings out the best in her because he sees her future.

      ~ A “bad” cause can have good effects ~

      [16:66] http://quran.com/16/66
      And indeed, for you in grazing livestock is a lesson. We give you drink from what is in their bellies – between excretion and blood – pure milk, palatable to drinkers.

      Grass [neutral] becomes shit & blood [impurity] becomes milk [very good!]

      ~ A good cause can have bad effects ~

      [16:67] http://quran.com/16/67
      And from the fruits of the palm trees and grapevines you take intoxicant and good provision. Indeed in that is a sign for a people who reason.

      And from fruits [good] comes both intoxicants [bad] and good provision [good].

      This is indeed a sign for those who reflect.

      — Writing and Causality —

      It is sad to see when a writer puts much effort in an article, only for most of the comments reflecting the opposite, but that is how reality is I guess.
      But Alhamdullilah the reward is with Allah through our acts+intentions and not with the people.

      I hope this helps.
      May Allah grant us all understanding and wisdom.

  2. Non-Takfiri,

    Using the “T” word is pretty pathetic. This word is purely a means by which to discredit and attack Islam. Any Muslim using such terminology should seriously question their loyalties.

  3. Bismillahi rahmani rahim,
    You can discredit the movement all you want and wag your tongues for as long as you want but the fact remains that Amir ul Mumineen Abubakr al Baghdadi has began the journey towards reclaiming all Muslim lands and making Muslims honorable and safe like we were before the khilafa was dismantled. And when Imam Mahdi comes, call him a takfiri or terrorist… when Jesus (Alayhi salaam) appears, call him a takfiri and a terrorist too. Then On yawm ul qiyamma we’ll see which ummah you belong to… You can stay in the comfort of your homes or march forth, either ways Allah’s promise is true.

    QURAN 9:81

    “Those who remained behind rejoiced in their staying [at home] after [the departure of] the Messenger of Allah and disliked to strive with their wealth and their lives in the cause of Allah and said, ‘Do not go forth in the heat.” Say, “The fire of Hell is more intensive in heat” – if they would but understand.”

    • Brother, i agree with you on this. We needed someone to take the initiative, and Al Baghdadi did it. But he should be more concerned with the internal affairs of the state now, than gaining more land. And if he proves he’s worthy of being called the Ameer then there will be bayahs from each and every corner of the world soon.

  4. You wrote:

    “Another reason that can’t be used to reject a claim of Islamic State, is the method used to create it, whether it was done by coup, revolution or elections. Despite some of those methods being illegitimate, once the Islamic State is created and fulfills all the criteria, it is accepted on the basis of its factual description.”

    So if a state/government/dawlah/whatever comes to formation through “democratic” elections…. BUT its factual description fits the criteria….. would you call it a “kafir” state?

  5. Can i use this article, of course with your credit, in my website, http://www.thenewskick.com? Thanks

  6. You could have saved your self an entire article if you had known ISIS is an offshoot of Al Qaeda, this invalidates any claim for an islamic state because they don’t adhere to the four Madhhabs and anyone not adhering to the majority will die the death of a jahil according to Rasul Allah (saws).

    The Prophet established this in a number of narration’s, “My community will not come together on misguidance”;”You have to follow the congregation for verily Allah will not make the largest group of Muhammad’s community agree on error.”; “A group of my community will continue on truth until the coming of the Hour.”; “Whoever leaves the community or separates himself from it by the length of a span, dies the death of the Jahiliyya (period of ignorance prior to Islam)”, “Whoever among you wants to be in the middle of Paradise, let him cling to the congregation.”, “Shaytan is a wolf like the wolf that preys on sheep, taking the isolated and the stray among them; therefore, avoid factionalism and keep to the congregation and the collective and the masjid.”, “Verily Allah has protected my Community from agreeing upon error.”, “Allah’s hand is over the group, and whoever dissents from them departs to hell.”, “Allah’s hand is over the group, follow the largest group, for verily whoever dissents from them departs to hell.”.

    Imam Muslim narrated in his Sahih, in The Book on Government (Kitab Al-Imara), what the prophet (saws) said muslims should do towards the end of time (here are two of these hadith):

    4553.
    It has been narrated on the authority of Hudhaifa b. al-Yaman who said: People used to ask the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) about the good times, but I used to ask him about bad times fearing lest they overtake me. I said: Messenger of Allah, we were in the midst of ignorance and evil, and then God brought us this good (time through Islam). Is there any bad time after this good one? He said: Yes. I asked: Will there be a good time again after that bad time? He said: Yes, but therein will be a hidden evil. I asked: What will be the evil hidden therein? He said: (That time will witness the rise of) the people who will adopt ways other than mine and seek guidance other than mine. You will know good points as well as bad points. I asked: Will there be a bad time after this good one? He said: Yes. (A time will come) when there will be people standing and inviting at the gates of Hell. Whoso responds to their call they will throw them into the fire. I said: Messenger of Allah, describe them for us. He said: All right. They will be a people having the same complexion as ours and speaking our language. I said: Messenger of Allah, what do you suggest if I happen to live in that time? He said: You should stick to the main body of the Muslims and their leader. I said: If they have no (such thing as the) main body and have no leader? He said: Separate yourself from all these factions, (even) though you may have to eat the roots of trees (in a jungle) until death comes to you and you are in this state.

    4555.
    It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: One who defected from obedience (to the Amir) and separated from the main body of the Muslims-if he died in that state-would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya (i. e. would not die as a Muslim). One who fights under the banner of a people who are blind (to the cause for which they are fighting. i. e. do not know whether their cause is just or otherwise), who gets flared up with family pride, calls, (people) to fight for their. family honour, and supports his kith and kin (i. e. fights not for the cause of Allah but for the sake of this family or tribe) -if he is killed (in this fight), he dies as one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya (Ignorance before Islam). Whoso attacks my Umma (indiscriminately) killing the righteous and the wicked of them, sparing not (even) those staunch in faith and fulfilling not his promise made with those who have been given a pledge of security-he has nothing to do with me and I have nothing to do with him. (i. e. is not my follower).

    ISIS are against the people of Syria and literally fighting them for control of there own country, this alone makes them illegitimate. its clearly stated in Ahadith the only people who are going to win this war are the people of Syria and Allah will kill everyone else including them.

    The Prophet (pbuh) Said: “So do not rebuke the people of Syria but rebuke the evil people among them because amongst them are the Abdals (Awliya). A flood is about to be sent down upon the people of Syria, which will disperse their groups in such a way, that if foxes attacked they would be beaten. At that time a man from the Family of my House will come under 3 banners; between 12-15,000 and their password is – ‘Die, die.’ Then, there will come 7 banners and under each will be one man seeking the kingdom. Allah will kill all of them and restore unity and favors upon the hearts of Muslims, and those who were far come close.”
     
    The Flood means a struggle that will expose their week points and disperse there groups, so that if an outside Force attacked they would win. The hadith is referring to a time before the Mahdi, and says the people of syria will have one leader with three banners under him and they will fight 7 different groups with seven different leaders, which is what is occurring now, Asad, Hizb Allah, Al Qaeda have two groups with two leaders and some factions from syria with there own leaders joined them, making that seven or nearly seven groups with distinct leaders and banners.
     
    And in another version:
     
    “At the end of time there will be a trial in which people will be sorted in a similar way to that in which gold is sorted from metal. Therefore do not rebuke the people of Syria rather, rebuke the evil people among them, because amongst them are the Abdals (Awliya). Allah will send a flood from Heaven (an event) that will disperse their groups in a way that if foxes were to attack them they would be victorious. Then Allah will send a man from the perfumed musked children of the Messenger, praise and peace be upon him, amongst approximately 12-15,000 under three banners and their password is ‘Die, die!’ And they will be fought by the people of 7 banners under each is a man seeking the kingdom. They will be killed, defeated, then the Hashimite will appear, so Allah will restore unity and favors to the people and this will be the case until the Dajjaal (the lying, false messiah) comes.”
     
    (They are found in the references of by Abu Dawud, Ahmad, Ibn Majah and At-Tabarani.)

    Al-Hakim narrated from ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib [radhiyallahu ‘anhu] that the Messenger of Allah [sallallahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam] said: “There will be at the end of time a trial that will sort out men as gold is sorted out from metal. So do not revile the people of Sham, but revile their evil ones, for among them are the Abdal [great righteous people]. A flood is about to be released upon the people of Sham that will split their unity, so that even if foxes attack them, they would defeat them. At that time, a man from my household will come out with three banners. The one who estimates highly will say that they are fifteen thousand. And the one who estimates lower will say that they are twelve thousand. Their sign will be: “Amit, amit [kill, kill].” They will meet in battle seven banners, and under each of those banners will be a man seeking the kingdom. Allah will kill all of them, and restore to the Muslims their unity and bounty, and their far ones and near ones.”

    Why this won’t occur later towards the time of the mahdi (r.a) is because, after the era of dictators ends when Asad is defeated (he is the last) the era of the Khalifa, Mahdi (r.a) and unity begins (“and restore unity and favors upon the hearts of Muslims”), this is why ISIS is declaring a khalifah now and making claims about his ancestry because the leader of the three banners is hashimi, other sahih hadith state after this war ends eventually europe will have control of sham before the mahdi’s time and this is where they will send armies against him from (the one that will be sunk into the ground) so sham will again fall under the control of the Kufar.

    The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: The Prophethood will remain amongst you for as long as Allah wills it to be. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it (meaning the Prophet will die). Then there will be the Khalifah upon the Prophetic methodology. And it will last for as long as Allah wills it to last. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be biting kingship (the khalifah until the ottomans), and it will remain for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be tyrannical (forceful) kingship (era of dictators that is now ending) and it will remain for as long as Allaah wills it to remain. Then He will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be a Khalifah upon the Prophetic methodology (The Mahdi (r.a)). Then he (the Prophet) was silent. (Musnad Imam Ahmad (v/273)

    The Prophet of Allah said: After me will come caliphs, and after the caliphs will come princes, and after princes there will be kings and after the kings, there will be tyrants. And after the tyrants a man from My House will fill the earth with justice and after him is al-Qahtani, By the One who sent me with the Truth! Not a word less. (Tabarani, Ibn Mandah, Ibn Asakir and Na‘īm bin Hammād (who was the teacher of Imam Bukhari) in his work “al Fitan wa Malahim” from ‘Abd ar-Rahmān bin Qays bin Jābir al-Sadafī. Kanz al-Ummāl, hadith #38704.)
     
    A scholar said regarding the different dynasties found in these narrations which all share the same meaning: We see that the caliphs spoken of in this hadith are “the Rightly- Guided Ones”: Abū Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and ‘Alī, may Allah the Exalted be pleased with them all. The princes are the Umayyad Caliphs of Damascus and the Abbasid Caliphs of Baghdad. As for the kings, they are the Ottoman Sultans of Istanbul. Following the kings, according to the hadith, are tyrants and that is what is commonly seen today. Finally, what for us is a prediction: the appearance of a man from the family of the Prophet who will rule with justice.
     
    These dynasties came in the exact same manner described by the prophet (pbuh) and the last era, the Era of the Tyrants (or tyrannical forceful kingship) is at an end now as we have seen the tyrants overthrown throughout the Muslim world over the past few years, this era will be followed by the era of the Khalifah or the Mahdi just as all these narrations mention.

    • Assalamu alaykum wr wb,

      (Unrelated to the ISIS issue)
      Just focusing on the hadith you quoted related to the following term.

      The Arabic word used in most of those hadith is جَمَاعَةَ “Jema’ah”.
      This is sometimes translated as:
      – majority,
      – main body of Muslims,
      – community or
      – congregration.

      If we look at the context of the hadith
      it doesn’t make sense for “Jema’ah”
      to mean “majority” or “main body of Muslims”.

      For example from the hadith quoted above
      Sahih al-Bukhari 3606 http://sunnah.com/bukhari/61/113
      “تَلْزَمُ جَمَاعَةَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَإِمَامَهُمْ
      …Adhere to the and their (leader).” I asked,
      فَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُمْ جَمَاعَةٌ وَلاَ إِمَامٌ
      “If there is neither nor an (leader)?” He said, “Keep away from all those different sects, even if you had to bite (i.e. eat) the root of a tree, till you meet Allah while you are still in that state.”

      If Jema’ah would mean “majority” / “main body of Muslims” the sentence would not make sense, because who is the leader of our “main body of Muslims” or majority today?
      It would make more sense for it to mean a community or congregation the condition of which is that it has an Imam (leader).

      And from numerous hadith we know that the Imam must be given the pledge of allegiance for him to be a legitimate leader of his group.

      ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (r.a.) said, “Laa Islam bi laa Jamaa’ati wa laa jamaa’ati bi laa Imaarah, wa laa Imaaratu bi laa sam’on wa taa’ah”. “There is no Islam without a community, and there is no community without a leadership, and there is no authority without hearing and obeying”.

      Thus one of the necessary conditions of a Jema’ah is for it to have a Leader.
      And one of the necessary conditions of leadership is to be listened to and obeyed.

      This is a pretty complex issue and I could be wrong.

      —-

      And on the following hadith interpretation (at the end of the post):

      “A scholar said regarding the different dynasties found in these narrations which all share the same meaning: We see that the caliphs spoken of in this hadith are “the Rightly- Guided Ones”: Abū Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and ‘Alī, may Allah the Exalted be pleased with them all. The princes are the Umayyad Caliphs of Damascus and the Abbasid Caliphs of Baghdad. As for the kings, they are the Ottoman Sultans of Istanbul. Following the kings, according to the hadith, are tyrants and that is what is commonly seen today. Finally, what for us is a prediction: the appearance of a man from the family of the Prophet who will rule with justice.

      These dynasties came in the exact same manner described by the prophet (pbuh) and the last era, the Era of the Tyrants (or tyrannical forceful kingship) is at an end now as we have seen the tyrants overthrown throughout the Muslim world over the past few years, this era will be followed by the era of the Khalifah or the Mahdi just as all these narrations mention.”

      Actually the general trend is correct I think, but there are some exceptions to the trend.
      The 5th Rightly Guided Caliph Umar bin Abd Aziz, Salahudin, Mehmed the Conqueror (of Constantinople, “the best Leader and the best army”)
      are definitely exceptions to the trend.

      The general trends are clearly shown in the Quran and Hadith.
      Just saying that when predicting the exact future, we will likely be wrong
      as have many people been in the past.

      I think those general trends are to give the Muslims hope, that in the end
      no matter the trials today
      we will be victorious.

      But for our decision making, we should follow the Prophet s.a.w. Sunnah of rigorous investigation, preparation and seizing opportunities.

      This is my best guess and Allah knows best.

      • Some text was missing which I put between “”
        Jema’ah and Imam is missing is some parts.

        …Adhere to Jema’ah the and their Imam (leader).” I asked,
        فَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُمْ جَمَاعَةٌ وَلاَ إِمَامٌ
        “If there is neither Jema’ah nor an Imam (leader)?

      • The advice is for the Deen not politics, the political leader of the ummah is the Khalif while each Imam follows a madhhab so it doesn’t matter who the Imam is his opinion is that of the madhhabs and there are only four, the jamaa is the consensus of scholars according to Imam Shafii and again that is the madhhabs. The hadith was advice for the muslim Ummah for a period we have faced already and are at the end of, going from an Ummah with a khalifah who followed the madhhabs to an Ummah with no khalifah and no central authority to uphold the shariah of the madhhabs. You have to relate it back what occurred in actual history, so the prophets (saws) last point was that when the presence of the madhhabs is no longer felt, followed and their authority no longer upheld He (saws) leave of the affairs of the people and stick to what you know is right, his last advice was to leave the alone what the general public is doning entirely and stay out of politics because in other ahadith i have not quoted he said this will be the time when al Ruwaibidah will take control of the affairs of people, he was who these people where and he (saws) said the “base evil doer”, all this will end when we enter the period of the khalifah again, the time of the mahdi (r.a).

        according to your translation we would follow the local shaykhs of our local community once the religious authority under the Khalifah is gone, because this has nothing to do with politics and by either definition the jamaah is still the jamaah of the madhhabs as this has always been the majority of the ummah.

        Umar abdul Aziz (r.a) doesn’t count, he did not break any trend or create one he was solitary (the opposite of trend) and was opposed in his rule by other khalifs even though he was righteous, the prophets (saws) words are literal so we shouldn’t stretch them to make unrealistic interpretations.

      • sorry for the missing words in my other post, i either typed to fast or there is something wrong with my keyboard.

  7. Interesting comment on ISIS: Israeli drink in #Raqqa (controlled by ISIS) in Turkish package.

    • There’s no doubting the Turkish regime has relations with the Zionists, even if it is now low key.

      And it makes sense the Muslims in Syria would be getting their supplies through Turkey.

      So this video really doesn’t tell us much that wouldn’t be very obvious anyway. Interesting though that the Turks go to all the trouble to re-package it.

  8. Assalamu ‘alaikum brother Abdullah, many thanks for your insightful piece.

    I have a question: how would, or could, one distinguish between “harsh implementation of shari’ah” and “destroying non-Muslim shrines and killing non-Muslim civilians”? If I’m not mistaken, you seem to accept the former for the greater good of the Ummah, but think the second is enough ground to negate the State’s illegitimacy. I think there can conceivably be an overlap between “destroying non-Muslim shrines” and “harsh (and misguided) implementation of the shari’ah, or vigilante justice”. So how do you draw the distinction? Put differently, both of the above acts- vigilante justice and destroying non-Muslim shrines- seem to fall in the broad category of “non-shari’ic”, albeit there may be a difference in degree. How can this difference in degree warrant the non-caliphate conclusion?

    Even regardless of that “overlap”, what is the evidence that civilian killings or destroying their places of worship is sufficient grounds for declaring the State’s illegitimacy? I know the question makes me sound like a sociopath, but I’m being sincere.

    I have another question which is not directly relevant:

    “Another reason that can’t be used to reject a claim of Islamic State, is the method used to create it, whether it was done by coup, revolution or elections. Despite some of those methods being illegitimate, once the Islamic State is created and fulfills all the criteria, it is accepted on the basis of its factual description.”

    I’m sure such a condition is qualified, can you share what the qualifications are?

    Thanks again,
    Hassan

  9. Reblogged this on oogenhand and commented:
    Was Al-Andalus a Maliki or a Salafi conquest?

  10. Reblogged this on ElderofZyklon's Blog!.

  11. US, UK Trained ISIS Leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi along with Mossad

    By Johnlee Varghese
July 15, 2014 19:12 IST
ibtimes.co.in

    With the White House yet to give a full clarification on reports that the US trained ISIS recruits in 2012, another damning information has been leaked.

    It has now emerged that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the terrorist group, was trained by Mossad, with the help of the US and the UK intelligence officials. The revelation was leaked by former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden.

    As per a report in Gulf Daily News, Snowden revealed that the US, the UK and Israel drew up a plan to protect the Zionist entity, by using a strategy called “the hornet’s nest”.

    The strategy was to get all the terrorists together in one place under an Islamic slogan and engaging them in a war far from Israel.

    In the documents leaked by Snowden, it claims that the ISIS was made for “the protection of the Jewish state”, and thereby keeping the enemies of Israel engaged.

    Snowden’s leak also revealed that ISIS leader and cleric al-Baghdadi was given intensive military training for a whole year by Mossad, besides lessons on Islam and public speaking.

    US Trained ISIS Jihadists?

    Multiple reports have stated that the US played a key role in training the recruits, who later become ISIS jihadists, who are currently controlling large swathes of land in Syria and Iraq.

    The WND had reported back in February 2012 that the US, along with Turkey and Jordan, was running a training base for Syrian rebels. And these trained rebels reportedly turned against the US later and went on to form the ISIS.

    Thousands of rebels were trained in 2012 and 2013 in Jordon, German weekly Der Spiegel reported.

    The report went on to note that the organizers of the training camps wore US Marine uniforms, and the recruits were trained in anti-tank weaponry.

    Source: http://www.ibtimes.co.in/us-uk-trained-isis-leader-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-along-mossad-604484#.U8U794bVE7o.facebook

    Snowden confirms that Al Baghdadi was trained by Israeli Intel Mossad

    GULF DAILY NEWS
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
WASHINGTON:

    The former employee at US National Security Agency (NSA), Edward Snowden, has revealed that the British and American intelligence and the Mossad worked together to create the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

    Snowden said intelligence services of three countries created a terrorist organisation that is able to attract all extremists of the world to one place, using a strategy called “the hornet’s nest”.

    NSA documents refer to recent implementation of the hornet’s nest to protect the Zionist entity by creating religious and Islamic slogans.

    According to documents released by Snowden, “The only solution for the protection of the Jewish state “is to create an enemy near its borders”.

    Leaks revealed that ISIS leader and cleric Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi took intensive military training for a whole year in the hands of Mossad, besides courses in theology and the art of speech.

    Source: http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/NewsDetails.aspx?storyid=381153

    ———-

    About Edward Snowden:

  12. The messenger of Allah mentions the Israli strategy in ahadith clearly:

    “At the end of time there will be a trial in which people will be sorted in a similar way to that in which gold is sorted from metal. Therefore do not rebuke the people of Syria rather, rebuke the evil people among them, because amongst them are the Abdals (Awliya). Allah will send a flood from Heaven (an event) that will disperse their groups in a way that if foxes were to attack them they would be victorious. Then Allah will send a man from the perfumed musked children of the Messenger, praise and peace be upon him, amongst approximately 12-15,000 under three banners and their password is ‘Die, die!’ And they will be fought by the people of 7 banners under each is a man seeking the kingdom. They will be killed, defeated, then the Hashimite will appear, so Allah will restore unity and favors to the people and this will be the case until the Dajjaal (the lying, false messiah) comes.”

    The Prophet mentions a flood would be sent, this is the Arab spring that swept to syria last and began this War, it dispersed its groups into factions, some fighting for the people of Syria, some fighting for Asad and some joining the terrorist factions fighting for themselves. this dispersion the prophet (saws) said about it “that if foxes were to attack them they would be victorious”, recently the fixes attacked they where victorious and claimed to have re-established the Khalifah only to be found out they are MOSSAD agents….the messenger of Allah goes on to say “Then Allah will send a man from the perfumed musked children of the Messenger”, this is not the Mahdi (r.a) but one of Ahl al Bayt. It is clear from this Hadith the only people who are going to win are the people of Syria, subhanna llah, wa alhamdullilah wa allahu akbar.

  13. Br if your able can you kindly fix the spelling “recently the fixes attacked” to “foxes”, jazak Allah.

  14. Bismillahi Rahmani Raheem

    regarding the prophets (saws) words, “They will be killed, defeated, then the Hashimite will appear, so Allah will restore unity and favors to the people and this will be the case until the Dajjaal (the lying, false messiah) comes.”

    regarding the Hashimite (the Mahdi), the prophets (saws) words are usually literal, we just need to understand the proper context, this hadith seems to give a narrow timeline then says ‘this will be the case until the Dajjaal’ and that period is over a decade in length according to other ahadith, other ahadith span events over multiple decades or even a centuries. Some scholars think before the Mahdi (r.a) appears he may be a leader or Imam in the world or someone who will work to improve the state of the Ummah before events unfold and show who he is. This hadith may refer to that initial time (then the Hashimite will appear) before he is known among the ummah and is working on ‘restoring unity and favors to the people’ before the real Khalifah is established again. wallahu allam.

    i wrote this for something else but thought id add further information from ahadith regarding what is going on:

    Regarding the hadith i Quoted about Syria and the Foxes: The trial is 9/11 which caused the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and literal dominance of the west over the Muslim world (not just economic), then the prophet mentions we should only rebuke the evil people of Syria, this is Asad and his people, the Prophet mentions a flood would be sent, this is the Arab spring that swept across the muslims world ending the era of dictators mention in ahadith then it went to syria last of all and began this War, it dispersed its groups into factions, some fighting for the people of Syria, some fighting for Asad and some joining the terrorist factions fighting for themselves. this dispersion the prophet (saws) said about it “that if foxes were to attack them they would be victorious”, recently the foxes (ISIS) attacked they where victorious and claimed to have re-established the Khalifah only to be found out they are MOSSAD agents….the messenger of Allah (saws) goes on to say “Then Allah will send a man from the perfumed musked children of the Messenger”, this is not the Mahdi (r.a) but one of Ahl al Bayt, the Mahdi is the Hashimi and will come soon after sanctions are placed on Egypt (mentioned in other ahadith). It is clear from this Hadith the only people who are going to win are the people of Syria, the people of Syria have one leader and under him are different banners while those who oppose them are different Bannaers with different leaders all hoping for the same thing just like the hadith mentions, the Banners are Asad, Hizb Allah, al Qaeda are two groups with two different leaders, and 2 groups from the people of Syria have joined al Qaeda and their groups, making that 6 Banners so far. At the time ISIS claimed to have won they where about 10,000 fighters in that war, i don’t know the exact figure.

    The following Ahadith Outline What is Occurring in Syria and Will Eventually Lead to These Sanctions:
     
    The Prophet (pbuh) Said: “So do not rebuke the people of Syria but rebuke the evil people among them because amongst them are the Abdals (Awliya). A flood is about to be sent down upon the people of Syria, which will disperse their groups in such a way, that if foxes attacked they would be beaten. At that time a man from the Family of my House will come under 3 banners; between 12-15,000 and their password is – ‘Die, die.’ Then, there will come 7 banners and under each will be one man seeking the kingdom. Allah will kill all of them and restore unity and favors upon the hearts of Muslims, and those who were far come close.”
     
    The Flood means a struggle that will expose their week points and disperse there groups, so that if an outside Force attacked they would win. The Sayid in this hadith is not the Mahdi but another descendant of Rasul Allah (saws).
     
    And in another version:
     
    “At the end of time there will be a trial in which people will be sorted in a similar way to that in which gold is sorted from metal. Therefore do not rebuke the people of Syria rather, rebuke the evil people among them, because amongst them are the Abdals (Awliya). Allah will send a flood from Heaven (an event) that will disperse their groups in a way that if foxes were to attack them they would be victorious. Then Allah will send a man from the perfumed musked children of the Messenger, praise and peace be upon him, amongst approximately 12-15,000 under three banners and their password is ‘Die, die!’ And they will be fought by the people of 7 banners under each is a man seeking the kingdom. They will be killed, defeated, then the Hashimite will appear, so Allah will restore unity and favors to the people and this will be the case until the Dajjaal (the lying, false messiah) comes.”
     
    (They are recorded in the references of Abu Dawud, Ahmad, Ibn Majah and by At-Tabarani.)

    Al-Hakim narrated from ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib [radhiyallahu ‘anhu] that the Messenger of Allah [sallallahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam] said: “There will be at the end of time a trial that will sort out men as gold is sorted out from metal. So do not revile the people of Sham, but revile their evil ones, for among them are the Abdal [great righteous people]. A flood is about to be released upon the people of Sham that will split their unity, so that even if foxes attack them, they would defeat them. At that time, a man from my household will come out with three banners. The one who estimates highly will say that they are fifteen thousand. And the one who estimates lower will say that they are twelve thousand. Their sign will be: “Amit, amit [kill, kill].” They will meet in battle seven banners, and under each of those banners will be a man seeking the kingdom. Allah will kill all of them, and restore to the Muslims their unity and bounty, and their far ones and near ones.”

    Ahadith on the sanctions that where placed on Iraq and the sanctions to be placed on Syria and then Egypt:

    Ibn kathir (r.a) placed three of the following Ahadith with the Great trials that would befall this Ummah just before the time of the Mahdi in his work.

    Abu Idrees Al-Joolaanee related that Hudhaifah ibn Al-Yamaan said, “By Allah, indeed I am the most knowledgeable of people regarding every trial that is to occur between me and the Hour… The Messenger of Allah was speaking about the trials in a gathering wherein I was present, and he was enumerating the trials, among which are three that will hardly leave anything. Among them are trials that are like the winds of the summer, among them are small trials, and among them are big ones. All from that group (who were present in that gathering) are gone except for me.” (Muslim)

    Abu Nadhrah reported: “We were sitting in the company of Jabir bin Abdullah (r.a.) when he said: It May Happen that the People of Iraq may not send their Qafiz and Dirhams. We said, “Who would be responsible for it?” He Said, “The Non-Arabs would prevent them.” He again said, “There is the possibility that the people of Shaam (Syria) may not send their Dinar and Mudd.” We said, “Who would be responsible for it? He said, “Prevention would be made by the Romans.” He (Jabir b Abdulah) Kept Quiet for a while and then reported Allah’s Messenger (saws) having said: “There would be a caliph in the last (period) of my Ummah who would freely give out handfuls of wealth to the people without counting it”. I said to Abu Nadra and Abu al-Ala, “Do you mean ‘Umar bin Abd al Aziz?” They said “No (he would be al Mahdi)”. (Muslim, Book41, Number 6961)

    Abu Nadhrah reported: “We were sitting in the company of Jabir bin Abdullah (r.a.) when he said: Soon the people of Iraq will neither receive any food (grain) nor any money.'” We asked, “Why would such a thing happen?” He replied, “Because of the non-Arabs.” He then said: “Soon the people of Shaam (Syria) will neither receive any money nor grain.” We asked as to why this would happen. He replied: “Because of the Romans.” And in the narration of al-Hakim there is the following addition: “Then he said: “By He in Whose Hand is my soul, the matter will return as it began. All Iman will return to al-Madinah, as it began from there, until all Iman will be in al-Madinah.” (Muslim, Volume 2, page 395, the book of tribulations and signs of the final hour)

    After describing these events, Jabir [radhiyallahu ‘anhu] then brought the saying of the Messenger of Allah [sallallahu ‘alayhi wa-sallam]: “There will be in my Ummah a khalifah who will give out wealth in heaps, without counting it.”

    Abu Hurairah related that the Messenger of Allah said, “Iraq will be prevented from its dirham (a currency) and its (Qifaz) measurement; Sham will be prevented from its (Mudd) measurement and its Dinar (a currency) and Egypt will be prevented from its Irdab (measurement) and its Dinar (currency). You will recoil to that position from where you started and you will recoil to that position from where you started, the bones and the flesh of Abu Huraira would bear testimony to it” (Muslim, Book 41 Hadith 6923)

    We lived through the Sanctions of Iraq, the Non Arabs (U.N, U.S and the coalition) stopped trade and food from entering the country and during this period the Iraqi currency was de-evaluated so they couldn’t trade with it preventing them from their measurement, “Iraq will neither receive any food (grain) nor any money.'”, “It May Happen that the People of Iraq may not send their Qafiz and Dirhams”. A Dirham is a currency, 1 Dinar = 4.45grams of gold and 1 Dirham = 0.7 Dinar. While a Qafiz is a measure of Oil, the word Qafiz has been used throughout history for a measure of Oil, because of Arab influence over southern Italy which borrowed some words from Arabic, one word in the Sicilian language is “Cafisu” or a “Cafiso” a measure of Oil. This indicates that the Hadith specifies the sanctions imposed on Iraq would be about Money and Oil, the prophet (saws) mentioned this long before Oil had any significance in the world and is exactly what occurred when sanctions where placed on Iraq.

    These sanctions have now been lifted, we are now living through the initial stages of the Syrian conflict and eventually we will see that country go through something similar to Iraq followed by Egypt.

    “Syria would withhold it’s Mudd and Dinar”, Mudd is a measure of wheat or generally speaking food such as rice, barley, bread, etc. One Mudd equals 3/4 of a kilogram or 708 grams. A Mudd is also a measure translated in today’s language as a “Bushel”. The sanctions on Syria according to the Hadith will then be about Food and Money, different from the sanctions placed on Iraq. The Prophet (saws) indicated to us some 1400 years ago that Iraq would produce Oil over which sanctions would be placed on it.

    Egypt will withhold it Irdab and Dinar, the word in the Hadith Irdab is a measurement specific to Egypt, 1 Irdab = 73Kg (of wheat), when referring to grain, Irdab generally means wheat free from dirt, rubbish and husks. More generally Irdab also refers to fruit in their dried state like dried dates and raisins. Therefor the sanctions on Egypt will impact the dinar (money) and the import of wheat and dried fruits. The measure of Irdab (73Kg) may indicate that the sanctions placed on Egypt may be more severe than those placed on Syria due to its large Quantity.

    The Ahadith mention the dominance of the non-Arabs (U.N, U.S and the coalition who oppressed Iraq) and the Romans (Europeans who will oppress Syria) over the Muslim’s, it will continue to extend around the Muslim world until we only have the Arabian peninsula (“you will return from whence you began”),even then other Ahadith say at that time our “most distant frontier outpost will be Salah” and other similar places at the time of the Dajjaal.

    The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: The Prophethood will remain amongst you for as long as Allah wills it to be. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it (meaning the Prophet will die). Then there will be the Khalifah upon the Prophetic methodology. And it will last for as long as Allah wills it to last. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be biting kingship, and it will remain for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then Allah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be tyrannical (forceful) kingship (era of dictators) and it will remain for as long as Allaah wills it to remain. Then He will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be a Khalifah upon the Prophetic methodology. Then he (the Prophet) was silent. (Musnad Imam Ahmad (v/273)

  15. !!! I’m Abbas from Iran
    Daesh is firend of Israel and Israel=Isis
    Isis is enemy of people
    Iran is friend of imam Mahdi (son of man) and imam Mahdi is not isis
    Daesh is not than Khorasan
    Khorasan white Khamenei and he is than son of imam Hussein

  16. Such a beautiful response and the best also. I asked a few local scholars, and they just told me that I.S is not on Haqq. But your response is so much soothing and it makes sense. I wish that there was more. May Allah have mercy on us.

  17. Salam, to all. Well for me the prophet a.s already said an army will come from Horasan With black flag who will fight and kill in way that has never being had before, taking over territories but would not be able to controle it people until they hand over power to a man who is from me, whose name will also be Muhammad bn Abdullah he will fill the world with justice just the way the world is fill with injustice. Book by ibn kasir, signs before the day of jugement. Only imam mahdi could really fulfil all these perfections. Allah listen to our cry for mercy, equity and Justice (amin)

Trackbacks

  1. Has the Caliphate been re-established by ISIS? | Siyasah Press
  2. A Peaceful Religion - Page 9 - Political Wrinkles
  3. Analyzing the Grand Strategy of ISIS | Saif Katana
  4. برگشت خلافت! – Mubareza-مبارزه

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: