Its an "Islamic state". (or states even - who says there must be only one?)

Beyond that, there is a lot up for debate.

How to choose leaders etc is up for debate.

The qur'an and sunnah would be the highest sources, but their interpretation would be down to people.

it would be sooooooooooo coool!!!!

ThE pOwEr Of SiLeNcE wrote:

What is it?

the khilafa is ONE islamic state that is leads by the Khalif(leader) who implements the sharia(laws given by Allah).

The khalif is accountable for every action he does and he must apply all the rules of Allah. He must make sure that everyone is getting their basic needs such as food, shelter and clothes. then other things such as the right to education and creating enough jobs for the people etc.

Non- muslims have the same right as muslims do as long as they pay the tax.

insha alllah this helps you understand a little more about khliafah, i will answer your questions to the best of my ability later on insha alllah

Why one?

For msot of Islamic history there were AFAIK multiple empires and kingdoms and clans.

The khalif is accountable for every action he does and he must apply all the rules of Allah. He must make sure that everyone is getting their basic needs such as food, shelter and clothes. then other things such as the right to education and creating enough jobs for the people etc.

This is the case for every ruler, wether they admit it or carry out the duties or not.

ThE pOwEr Of SiLeNcE wrote:

What is the "ht" understanding of khilafa?

who are you asking and what do you mean??

i thought everybody had the same understanding of khilafa, that it is an islamic state ruled by one khalif

to understand what is khilafa and whether we have to work for it and so on, we have to talk about it in depth. we have to look at the prophet'(SAW) life and what he lived for as he is our guide.

we have to understand why Allah(SWT) gave us sharia, do you think we should be living under sharia law?

You wrote:

Why one?

For msot of Islamic history there were AFAIK multiple empires and kingdoms and clans.

The khalif is accountable for every action he does and he must apply all the rules of Allah. He must make sure that everyone is getting their basic needs such as food, shelter and clothes. then other things such as the right to education and creating enough jobs for the people etc.

This is the case for every ruler, wether they admit it or carry out the duties or not.

Abu Sa'id al-Khudri narrated that the Prophet said: "When the oath of allegiance has been taken for two Khalifs, kill the latter of them". [Muslim]

Abdullah b. ‘Amru b. al-‘A'as said that he heard the Messenger of Allah say: "Whoever pledged allegiance to an Imam giving him the clasp of his hand and the fruit of his heart, he should obey him as long as he can, and if another comes to dispute with him, you must strike the neck of the latter". [Muslim]

Afrajah said: I heard the Messenger of Allah say: "Whosoever comes to you while your affairs has been united under one man, intending to break your strength or dissolve your unity, kill him." [Muslim]

It has additionally been reported in "as-Sirah" of Ibnu Ishaq that Abu Bakr went on to say on the day of Thaqifa: "It is forbidden for Muslims to have two Amirs for this would cause differences in their affairs and concepts, their unity would be divided and disputes would break out amongst them. The Sunnah would then be abandoned, the bida'a (innovations) would spread and Fitna would grow, and that is in no one's interests".

When it comes to ahadith, it is a general acceptance that the early Muslims would understand them and their contexts better.

I am certain that Hadhrat Ali (ra) and Hadhrat Amir Mu'awiyah had a better understanding of ahadith and of their implementation than we have now. Same with ummul mu'mineen Hadhrat Aisha Sideeqa (ra).

More, those ahadith do not talk about having two leaders in two separate places. For instance if three people go on a journey, it is encouraged that one is given leadership.

There has rarely been a single united khilafah. It was present in the time of the rashidun caliphate and not very often since. there have always been multiple caliphates, kingdoms, emirates and all sorts.

Salahuddin Ayyubi is often credited with uniting many Muslim lands. Yet, even at the end of his reign, there were many empires:

That is a problem for the HT, who suggest that there was one single united caliphate all the way until 1924.

I dont really know what "they" believe. I would guess there will be a broad range of beliefs as no two people will be identical.

The discussion on taxes etc that was had a few months ago on here was also interesting. and the idea about borders.

They are not extreme per se, just unrealistic. There can be some good passion in there, even if it can be misdirected etc.

and always railing against "man made law", not realising that even in an islamic state, where the qur'an and sunnah are the main basis for law, it would still be man made, and hence still be imprefect.

It would also not always be a singular law as two people looking at the same sources could come to differing conclusions on the same matter.

So the idea that there is "only one way" is pretty naive and can cause problems.

They're just young.

hello im new to the revival

but I saw this thread and I wanteded to say regarding your third question how would we work for it. their would be one leader as the prophet showed us, as we should follow his exmaple, and everyday we are with out one we are going to spend a day in hellfire but I don't know weather the hadith it was from is strong or weak.
I mean if there was supposd to be one leader then the other khalifs would have made multiple leaders. but fromtheir time you could ee ub leaders of other states.

There were multiple leaders at the time of Hadhrat Ali (ra).

We accept them both (thought only Hadhrat Ali (ra) is a part of the rashidun caliphs.)

You wrote:

They're just young.

i don't think it is fair to patronize them because they are young, they may have a lot more understanding than you or me i don't think it is fair to judge them without at least gettinh to know them

would you not agree?

who's to say that they're thinking is unrealistic especially without speaking to them, LOL

anyway lets forget about that and put it behind us

i would like to get back to the subject of khilafah

i think that we should work for it because i take it as an obligation to a muslim just like the 5 daily prayers. i strongly believe that Islam is here to abolish pre-islamic traditions and to be dominant in this world. i also believe that the sahabah worked for this and that this is the way they understood Islam to be.

i am not too sure about the exact method of how to achieve this in this day and age but i am still learning insha allah.

i would like to know if you agree or disagree and the reasons for doing so. my mind is always open as i ask Allah for guidance. the reason i came onto this site was to spread what little i know and to learn all that i do not insha allah

please do not take anything i have said in offense as i love you all for the sake of Allah

The problem with large states is that the individual is small in them and can be trampled on.

A further problem with large states is taht they eventually crumble as the people in them have differences and inequalities can be exploited.

If you look at Muslim history, there are many different forms of govenment used, and not just one fully defined version.

I am in favour of smallish libertarian societies that are linked together in the EU like model (or if you don't want to use western influences, how about the abbasid or ayyubid model? they all had separate emirates etc that were autonomous or semi autonomous).

Khilafah starts at home

He may mean trying to establish khilafah in the UK - Al-Muhajirun.

MuslimBro wrote:

He may mean trying to establish khilafah in the UK - Al-Muhajirun.

LOLLLLLLLL

Al Mugles

LOLLLLLLLL