Supremacy of Quran and Sunnah. If you call it Khilafah, so be it. If you call it theodemocracy, so be it.

There are no hard and fast rules regarding election or selection. I personally find election a better procedure (in the light of Quran and Sunnah), but again it is left to be applied as it suits the occassion, time and place.

Again, the Quran and Sunnah do not prescirbe hard and fast rules. The tenure of Caliph is also left to be applied as it suits the occassion, time and place.


In my opinion, she might not be.

Election and Selection.

A tradition which is not absolute. (I'll not go into authenticity discussion).

Era of the renaissance dawned and the people gave their thoughts a wide perspective.
When Science enlightened their approach, they knew Sun was just a star in the solar System not a god.
They knew that the globe of Earth is not hung on horn of a bull.
Comets shoot due to the scientific reason… a shooting star is not a sign of ensuing devine punishment and the like various other religious myths and fanciful superstitions stood quite idiotic and misleading.
Christian clerks opposed the movement of renaissance in Europe and rejected scientific knowledge on some meaningless grounds, their arguments on the name of religion were not acceptable to human logic and wisdom.
This gave the enlightened minds a number of solid reasons to defy religious blocks on their way to reformation.
Progress in science and technology, renovation of ideas and intellect, language and literature perceived a big danger in the presence of certain religious elements.
The stimulus was robust enough to opt for SECULARISM which implied to the exclusion of religion from the private affairs of life and from the business of the state and science.

HAD ISLAM EVER BEEN UNDERSTOOD AND WELL KNOWN TO THOSE PEOPLE AS A RELIGION THEY HAD NEVER GONE FOR SECULARISM…

ISLAM GAVE THEM ALL WHAT MADE THEM GO FOR SECULARISM…

ISLAM IS THE BEST SECULARISM AND THE STATE SHOULB BE ISLAMIC.

Once I asked him to correct me if I was wrong as regards to non-Muslims serving in army, was it enough that he said he is researching? You both kinda switched to politics and where I disagree with one of his posts, I believe you were also putting words in his mouth. Let me enlighten you about something.

Islam is undoubtedly a religion of justice and equality but there is more to it. Under Islam, only Muslims are full citizens. Non-Muslims form a protected minority and do not enjoy full citizenship. Its the duty of the government to protect their interests, their person, their property and honour. They are not to be defamed. However, there are certain matters at which they are not at par with Muslims. For example, the legislation has to be done within framework of Quran and Sunnah and those who do not believe in it, cannot be entrusted to legislate. This was the point Shahzaib was trying to tell you and probably the status of non-Muslims made him think that they cannot fight war.

__________________
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever."

first let me know what is your definition of citizenship ???

on one hand you are calling Islam the religion professing justice and equality and on the other call an islamic state to deprive the minorities with full citizenship. in what sense is this kinda equality and justice ???

A non muslim does not know Extreme form of religion which talibans represent while flogging a girl publicly and torchring people for not offering prayers as well as for not having a prescribed beard on their face....

But there is no one who does not know the golden principles of fairplay, universal brotherhood, mutual co existence, social and political justice, equality and elevation of human values.

if you consider these doctrines while legislating the laws in parliaments yes the non muslims can also understand them and their value
and let me tell you this is nothing else but What Islam is all about...

What difference does it make if we discuss what made them go for secularism? Even secular theocracy is an oxymoron, what to talk to Islam as the best secularism.

Last but not the least, why do we love coupling Islam with democracy, theocracy, secularism etc all the time? I mean lets give Islam the superiority by telling the democrats or secularists, what right it confers over individuals.

P.S: Purely my view.

__________________
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever."

and this time when you are giving the topic a political turn while talking about the citizenship and their rights...
see
i am not blaming you for putting words in mouth to deviate the discussion from actual theme..



Democrats, secularists and other non muslim community of the world know the parts of islam in form of democarcy,secularism and stuff like that...
let them understand islam by the language they understand.
we therEfor, couple democracy and secularism to islam...
let them collect all parts and rebuild them to see the total image in form of THE GREAT ISLAM....

In general, citizenship refers to rights and duties of members of a state.
This is not my opinion. This is the agreed upon status of non-Muslims in an Islamic state. They do form a protected minority. The security of life and property, freedom of religion were ensured to non-Muslims who were styled “Dhimmi” or “the protected of God and the Prophet , something any secular mind cannot digest (in general) . In this sense, it confers equal rights and opportunities. But everything is not black and white. Can a non-Muslim be the head of the Islamic state? No, he cant be. When it comes to ijtihad, can a non-Muslim do that (lets not forget that piety is one of the major prerequisites for a mujtahid). I hope I am clear now.

Lets not push ourselves towards extremes. Did I ever drag Taliban in my discussion (talking about this particular thread) ? Lets judge Islam from the the one (P.B.U.H) who set the best precedent for us. Like Dr. Zakir Naik says, black sheep are there in every community. They exist in Muslims as well as non-Muslim communities.

I hope I am already clear.

I was talking about Islam, do you consider citizenship of Islamic state as something not regulated by Islam?
Once I blamed you for putting words in another member’s mouth, I actually meant to say that you drove him off the rails by bringing in Taliban, Afghanistan, CIA etc (like you dragged Taliban flogging a girl in your recent posts). You can talk about any aspect of political system under Islam, I’ll be more than glad to learn from you.

__________________
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever."

what wil you do of a security in which you do not have chances to develop ???
if you u are treated as chattels entitled to be protected only but not given equal footings on the instances of political power and development on all counts. would you not prefer death ??

no dear it is not clear
tell me
how do the muslims of india conduct ijtihad ? they hav got a non muslim state leaders after all ???


you can not neglect the distortion of the global image of islam done by the extremists muslims..and i gave its example to make my point of view clear to you ...


to understand some thing by exactly how it is by itself is tough..
you have to use examples from the environment to reach at the point of proper understanding... these all examples were no exception to it...
our religion its implications and practices in the contemporary world includes these topx too under discussion

Did you read the hadith that I posted as regards to non-Muslims serving in a Muslim army? Kindly read that again and you’ll know whats the second option as regards to lands that are conquered . So, if they (non-Muslims) do not want to live under protection of Islamic state, they can move to foreign lands (where they’ll have equal rights). So, if they find Allah’s order as injustice or inequality on part of Islam, so be it.

You confused one example with another. Did I say that ijtihad can only be done under a Muslim head of state? I didn’t. I meant to say that there are certain prerequisites if one wants to do ijtihad e.gone should have sound knowledge of Quran and Sunnah, the Arabic language, the tafseers, different schools of though etc and one of these majors prerequisites is piety of a mujtahid. Am I clear now?

In the same way, we cannot deny the distortion of Christianity (crusades, blasphemy etc), Judaism (atrocities of Israel), Hinduism (Bloodshed of Muslims and etc by their followers. These religions never taught those things.
Agreed, I know that comes under discussion but its always nice if things are discussed in a systematic way (that will help those who want to learn somet. Plus, we gotta see the meaning, implications and practices of secularism in the contemporary world as well, though I’ll try to be systematic and discuss that later.

__________________
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever."

Yes i did have the Hadis in front of me, But i am really confused with the meaning that you are taking out of it.

"Islam is spread on th nock of sword"
This is indeed a world known misconception against Islam where Sword does not necessarily mean a dagger or metallic weapon rigid doctrines are also no less than a sword itself.

Keeping the overcome non muslims subjects at length from the state affairs and letting their rights be a dream for them in the same state which they too own in an equal proportion to every one else, Can you attract and impress them towards embracing Islam.?

As under this situation minority watches a rigid and unwelcoming attitude on part of the religion…

Now I am going to be simpler for you .. Please do not take it personal….

For a second consider Pakistan as the Muslim minority state , where Fatima47 is a qualified candidate for the upper political portfolio, whole minority is backing her and her worth is well known to the majority also.
By every angle she deserves to be rightly appointed at the higher political office in the state but her candidature is unfortunately rejected only because she is a Muslim.
Now what would be her personal feelings and more importantly feelings of the whole minority behind her…
Will she appreciate the system at the backdrop of this doctrine ? can she ever be impressed with dat dear ?

Ofcourse not.

She would have rather admired it if her worth had been respected and after she had tasted the matchless justice and equality benefits by getting her rights.



I read you saying that State can not have a non Muslim head and you supported this notion with your argument which read as how can ijtihad be carried out with the head of state being non muslim….
Re read your previous post …

I just passed your argument under the light of the example of India…
I think it was not confusing… it was obvious..


you are Absolutely right no one should ever refute it.. who said you to anyways?

and never neglect the one done by these muslims too…

Discussion keeps giving the topic new directions as it invites the individual arguments for which you can not stop any one giving examples and can not stop yourself also correcting him with other logical examples … this way you have a number of dimensions present in your single topic.

Group discussions, t.v table talks .. especially those of our political leaders on news channels these days are a good example in this context …

regards.