Khilafah in simple words

[Socrates]

Religious Jews want Khilafah back

There are lots of Jews in and out of Israel who doenst want Khilafat system, and their number is quite significantly larger than few rabbis in that video. Which one would you take for face value?

 

[R2D2]

Thanks for the clarification. So i infer that Khilafat system is ideally suited for Muslims. In such a scenario it is best suited for Muslims to stick with Muslim nations and non-muslim to stick with non-muslim nations. Whats you take on that?

The ideological state and non-ideological is not compatible with each other. Let both entities not bother each other, let both of them stick to their own rules and be peaceful.

Though i am foreseeing lots of demographic changes in the future. Already in Europe and North America they have started devising strategic plans.

Actually after putting their house in order, muslims are enjoined to spread the word of Islam. It can be through Tabligh these days as preaching of Islam is allowed in all countries. The other systems are in fact Zulm on the people even if they are non-believers. I can give you one example, the money lender usurps lands of poor farmers.

There are lots of Jews in and out of Israel who doenst want Khilafat system, and their number is quite significantly larger than few rabbis in that video. Which one would you take for face value?

The jews and the zionists are two different groups in Israel.

 

[Quwa]

Thanks for the clarification. So i infer that Khilafat system is ideally suited for Muslims. In such a scenario it is best suited for Muslims to stick with Muslim nations and non-muslim to stick with non-muslim nations. Whats you take on that?

The ideological state and non-ideological is not compatible with each other. Let both entities not bother each other, let both of them stick to their own rules and be peaceful.

Though i am foreseeing lots of demographic changes in the future. Already in Europe and North America they have started devising strategic plans.

I have a couple of points.

If I wanted to participate and succeed politically in the West, I would have to openly adopt secularism, capitalism and democracy as my ideology, as the basis of all of my values irrespective of faith. In other words, me being a Muslim can have no impact on my decision to legalize homosexuality, for example. So besides my personal time, what is Islam to me in such a system? Nothing. In fact, my adoption of Islam in such a scenario would stem from the basis of secularism, i.e. my need to satisfy spiritual sanctification, but my practical values and ideas stem from secularism and capitalism.

Within the Islamic System (i.e. Khilafah), it's the same. In order to politically engage and succeed, one as to adopt the Islamic ideology, they need to be Muslim. It's common sense really, how can you expect a communist to run a capitalist state.

That said, Islam isn't meant for just Muslims, it is directed to all of humanity. Allah (swt) even speaks to non-Muslims within the Qur'an, separately from Muslims. The Khilafah has a set of entrenched laws that serve to regulate the lives of all citizens, Muslim and non-Muslim.

Where Muslims pay zakat in tax, non-Muslims pay jizya in tax, both from their excess wealth stocks (after expenses, not on income or revenue). When it comes the socio-economic rights, all citizens -- Muslim and non-Muslim -- are equal, i.e the hadith "every SON of Adam is entitled to food, water and shelter." In other words, a Hindu would be entitled to the same educational, health and other benefits as a Muslim. To go further, there are even strict protections put in favour non-Muslims, i.e. the act of insulting, threatening, etc a non-Muslim citizen being a huge act of oppression, to the extent the Prophet Muhammad (saw) said, "he who harms a person under covenant is not of me."

Yes, non-Muslims are not active political actors in the Khilafah, why would they be when they haven't adopted the Islamic ideology? However, if a person were to become Muslim (a change in thoughts and concepts), they are free to move up the political and ruling ladder, irrespective of their background, race, name, etc.

 

[Socrates]

Actually after putting their house in order, muslims are enjoined to spread the word of Islam. It can be through Tabligh these days as preaching of Islam is allowed in all countries. The other systems are in fact Zulm on the people even if they are non-believers. I can give you one example, the money lender usurps lands of poor farmers.

If this is what the whole agenda is, isnt this Khilafat system a supremofascist and imperialist ideology? Would non-muslims be allowed to spread faith in this Khilafat system?

If after setting up Khilafat, its going go after other countries, the scene gets dirty. Then there is no room for diplomacy or humanatarian consideration left behind. If that is the agenda, i dont think we cannot blame any nonmuslim country to invade a muslim country and impose their rules on those muslim countires. Tit for Tat, this policies works in international politics. One should not wait for their enemies to get strengthened and knock at their borders someday.

Zulm or Nyay varies from perception of people. How can some one impose ones perspective to another?

 

[Alienoz_TR]

Caliphate is nightmare. I know because my ancestors experienced it. Whole folk is sheeps of one semi-intelligent munafiq. Caliph was praying namaz in front of Muslims, then playing piano in backdoors. There is no place for individual thought, just follow the shepherd who in case follows his western puppetmasters.

 

[Cherokee]

US, britain and India have no problem with muslims in their armies. So its a hypothetical question. If they don't trust the muslims, then they can impose a charge (call it jizya) just like paying for security of your neighborhood to a private security company.

If non-muslims don't pay jizya just like not paying your ordinary income tax, they are legally prosecuted

Its stupid on so many levels i won't even go explaining it .

 

[Socrates]

I have a couple of points.

If I wanted to participate and succeed politically in the West, I would have to openly adopt secularism, capitalism and democracy as my ideology, as the basis of all of my values irrespective of faith. In other words, me being a Muslim can have no impact on my decision to legalize homosexuality, for example. So besides my personal time, what is Islam to me in such a system? Nothing. In fact, my adoption of Islam in such a scenario would stem from the basis of secularism, i.e. my need to satisfy spiritual sanctification, but my practical values and ideas stem from secularism and capitalism.

Within the Islamic System (i.e. Khilafah), it's the same. In order to politically engage and succeed, one as to adopt the Islamic ideology, they need to be Muslim. It's common sense really, how can you expect a communist to run a capitalist state.

That said, Islam isn't meant for just Muslims, it is directed to all of humanity. Allah (swt) even speaks to non-Muslims within the Qur'an, separately from Muslims. The Khilafah has a set of entrenched laws that serve to regulate the lives of all citizens, Muslim and non-Muslim.

Where Muslims pay zakat in tax, non-Muslims pay jizya in tax, both from their excess wealth stocks (after expenses, not on income or revenue). When it comes the socio-economic rights, all citizens -- Muslim and non-Muslim -- are equal, i.e the hadith "every SON of Adam is entitled to food, water and shelter." In other words, a Hindu would be entitled to the same educational, health and other benefits as a Muslim. To go further, there are even strict protections put in favour non-Muslims, i.e. the act of insulting, threatening, etc a non-Muslim citizen being a huge act of oppression, to the extent the Prophet Muhammad (saw) said, "he who harms a person under covenant is not of me."

Yes, non-Muslims are not active political actors in the Khilafah, why would they be when they haven't adopted the Islamic ideology? However, if a person were to become Muslim (a change in thoughts and concepts), they are free to move up the political and ruling ladder, irrespective of their background, race, name, etc.

In layman language its a pressure tactic to convert people, isnt it? The same capatilist democratic country you are living in, someday can legislate to become an similar ideological country based on their xyz religion and implement system similar to Khilafat system. Would you ok with that?

The golden rule (that what you apply on others should accepted vice versa) should apply , isnt it?

 

[Alienoz_TR]

More things, during the caliphate power was in the hands of Donme Jews. Those were Muslim in public, but practising Judaism secretly, also doing things like wife-swapping etc... They shaped the politics of Ottomans, and indirectly Caliphate.

 

[R2D2]

If this is what the whole agenda is, isnt this Khilafat system a supremofascist and imperialist ideology? Would non-muslims be allowed to spread faith in this Khilafat system?

If after setting up Khilafat, its going go after other countries, the scene gets dirty. Then there is no room for diplomacy or humanatarian consideration left behind. If that is the agenda, i dont think we cannot blame any nonmuslim country to invade a muslim country and impose their rules on those muslim countires. Tit for Tat, this policies works in international politics. One should not wait for their enemies to get strengthened and knock at their borders someday.

Zulm or Nyay varies from perception of people. How can some one impose ones perspective to another?

As I said these days Muslims are allowed to do Tabligh in other countries, so there is no reason for panic that muslim hordes will invade them in near future or Jihad on India. Khilafah will have to sort its own problems for maybe atleast 50 years.

Islam thinks of Usury, drinking, sex out of marriage, gambling, hoarding as Zulm to individuals and society.

More things, during the caliphate power was in the hands of Donme Jews. Those were Muslim in public, but practising Judaism secretly, also doing things like wife-swapping etc... They shaped the politics of Ottomans, and indirectly Caliphate.

didn't know about that i.e.e Donme Jews. There were certainly free mason cells in the jewish quarter. The intelligence deptt. is there to remove such problems in every country.

 

[Socrates]

As I said these days Muslims are allowed to do Tabligh in other countries, so there is no reason for panic that muslim hordes will invade them in near future or Jihad on India. Khilafah will have to sort its own problems for maybe atleast 50 years.

These liberties of muslims allowing to do Tabligh in other countires can be stopped any day. If an action is unfair people have their right to protect their interests in their country. Anyways if any sane person would not wait for 50 years for Khilafat to be powerful to knock at their doorsteps. So its better to start aggressive and invading the potential Khilafat countries to be protect the interests. I am sure you will not have any problem with that action of non-muslims.

 

[R2D2]

These liberties of muslims allowing to do Tabligh in other countires can be stopped any day. If an action is unfair people have their right to protect their interests in their country. Anyways if any sane person would not wait for 50 years for Khilafat to be powerful to knock at their doorsteps. So its better to start aggressive and invading the potential Khilafat countries to be protect the interests. I am sure you will not have any problem with that action of non-muslims.

I don't think India would want to get mired in a guerrilla campaign stretching from Kashmir to God knows where. Anyway if you look at the proposed blood borders map you will notice that India has nothing to fear

Peters’ “Blood borders” map

As I said the Khilafah will have too much problems in educating the people to forget nationalism and democracy which are monumental problems and will take a very long time to solve. In addition to that there may not be support for external campaigns e.g the debate between Stalinists and Trotskyists in USSR over expansion

 

[The SC]

If this is what the whole agenda is, isnt this Khilafat system a supremofascist and imperialist ideology? Would non-muslims be allowed to spread faith in this Khilafat system?

If after setting up Khilafat, its going go after other countries, the scene gets dirty. Then there is no room for diplomacy or humanatarian consideration left behind. If that is the agenda, i dont think we cannot blame any nonmuslim country to invade a muslim country and impose their rules on those muslim countires. Tit for Tat, this policies works in international politics. One should not wait for their enemies to get strengthened and knock at their borders someday.

Zulm or Nyay varies from perception of people. How can some one impose ones perspective to another?

You sound like someone with a very deep misunderstanding for/of Islam and its principles. Non-Muslims and mostly Christians tried their best with 12 consecutive crusades to fight Islam and force Muslims to convert or be killed, the numbers of killings was astounding, meaning that almost all the Muslims refused and preferred to die even when not armed, until a final Muslim victory that put an end to the crusader's misadventures. This is like when a society adopts a law that corrects a previous one or many other laws that were faulty, and someone comes along and tries to impose the old law in that society, would that work in your opinion?
Muslims did not invade others for the purpose of invading them and looting their property, they usually sent messengers with an invitation to join Islam. When this invitation (with no coercision whatsoever) was perceived as a threat, and very powerful and arrogant kings and nations waged war on Muslims for an innocent invitation to join them in faith, Muslims, although they were outnumbered most of the time got the upper-hand in the wars, which shows the strength of their faith and subsequently showed the virtues of Islam after they subdued their enemies, who were not perceived as enemies either before or after the outcome of the war.

 

[R2D2]

Additionally, there may be practical limits to expansion and management of governing a continent size of a country as Indians may have first hand experience at it. That's why India doesn't annex Nepal, Bhutan etc. they have hands full with their own problems

 

[Socrates]

You sound like someone with a very deep misunderstanding for/of Islam and its principles. Non-Muslims and mostly Christians tried their best with 12 consecutive crusades to fight Islam and force Muslims to convert or be killed, the numbers of killings was astounding, meaning that almost all the Muslims refused and preferred to die even when not armed, until a final Muslim victory that put an end to their misadventures. This is like when a society adopts a law that corrects a previous one or many other laws that were faulty, and someone comes along and tries to impose the old law in that society, would that work in your opinion?
Muslims did not invade others for the purpose of invading them and looting their property, they usually sent messengers with the an invitation to join Islam. When this invitation (with no coercision whatsoever) was perceived as a threat, and very powerful and arrogant kings and nations waged war on Muslims for an innocent invitation to join them in faith, Muslims, although they were outnumbered most of the time got the upper-hand in the wars, which shows the strength of their faith and subsequently showed the virtues of Islam after they subdued their enemies, who were not perceived as enemies either before or after the outcome of the war.

There is no misunderstandings buddy. I was only replying to his remarks and informations. He only mentioned that after 50 years till the Khilafat home is normalized, it will start expanding towards others. What more should i understand from them.

For every unfair action there will be retaliation. When one get the taste of retaliation there is no point in crying victimhood and unfairness. The whole initial "action" creates the whole process. Who are anyone to send invitation to invitation to faith, why dont give and take respect to each others faith.

What i understand the points is that, what this system wants is power and control. Its my analysis and am entitled to stick to my views. I respect your right to hold your view as well.

 

[Quwa]

In layman language its a pressure tactic to convert people, isnt it? The same capatilist democratic country you are living in, someday can legislate to become an similar ideological country based on their xyz religion and implement system similar to Khilafat system. Would you ok with that?

The golden rule (that what you apply on others should accepted vice versa) should apply , isnt it?

Sure, let's say it is (that the Khilafat wants people to become Muslim)... From the view of the Khilafah, it views its ideology as the correct ideology and that it spreading it is not for the sake of domination, but saving people from hellfire.

I am not going to sugar coat it, spreading Islam is the overarching foreign policy constant of the Khilafah. That's the reality of ideological states: When the U.S goes to war in Iraq or Afghanistan, it's there to preserve and strengthen its core ideological interests, i.e. capitalism (if not abroad, then definitely at home). Of course in the case of Khilafah, it isn't there to secure resources for the benefit of an entitled few, but rather, ensure that all people receive their entitled due.

Also, the Khilafat isn't in the business of fighting civilians or destroying property (*cough* U.S *cough*), but merely fighting enemy armies on the battlefield to the extent that Islam can flow.

In other words, collateral damage, harming individual people, etc, is categorically impermissible, regardless of the circumstances. The second Caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab (RA), was assassinated by a disgruntled Persian, yet the Muslims did not put Persians under profiling or added oppression. In fact, the person the Muslims had a problem with was the son of Umar (RA)'s predecessor, who killed a suspect, which is not permitted in Islam! They even held a tribunal to determine if the person ought to be executed!

That said, while a democracy can legislate laws on a whim (i.e. one day tell me to abandon Islam entirely), the Khilafat system's laws and values are inalienable. In other words, when Allah (swt) says, "there is no compulsion in faith" - then that's end of story, neither the Imam or the Muslims could force non-Muslims to become Muslims, no matter what their wishes or whims.

Yes, one would have to be a Muslim in order to become a politically relevant figure (though non-Muslims are encouraged to participate in order to secure their rights, as non-Muslims), just as I would need to abandon Islam on matters of public affairs in order to be a relevant figure in the West. How can a system survive when its actors hold conflicting thoughts?

Of course the system would reject those that are not in alignment, that's not a moral PoV, it's a reality. Can I participate in the Western democratic system now and say women have no right to own property? Nope. On the same note, a person saying women can't own anything would be rejected by the Islamic system as well.

To put it simply, a non-Muslim individual wanting to live their life in the sense of attaining a comfortable socio-economic status (e.g. job, property, etc) could do so as much as a Muslim. Moreover, a non-Muslim can also manage their personal relationships (e.g. marriage, or not...pork, or not... etc) according to their own beliefs. No one, under any circumstance, can take that away from you...and if they do, they're oppressors.