"I don't doubt Imran's Intention but He doesn't have the solution" - Zaid Hamid
- Thread starter ricky12
- Start date
Khalid
Minister (2k+ posts)
ambroxo
Minister (2k+ posts)
میرے خیال میں ابھی بھی وقت ہے اگر ڈاکٹر صاحب کوئی اچھی سی مصروف جگہ دیکھ کر ہومیوپیتھک کی دوکان کھول لیں تو بچت کا چانس ہے
Khalid
Minister (2k+ posts)
ZH saheb khilafat lana chahtey hain
DR saheb electoral system change kurna chahtey hian
IK change lana chahta hai ...
ALLAH khair karey Pakistan ka ..
DR saheb electoral system change kurna chahtey hian
IK change lana chahta hai ...
ALLAH khair karey Pakistan ka ..
ambroxo
Minister (2k+ posts)
ambroxo
Minister (2k+ posts)
کوئی اور بھی تو تاک میں ہے
اللہ کریم تو خیر ہی کرتے ہیں
اللہ کریم تو خیر ہی کرتے ہیں
Khalid
Minister (2k+ posts)
ambroxo
Minister (2k+ posts)
karachiwala
Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
Khalid
Minister (2k+ posts)
ambroxo
Minister (2k+ posts)
@AsifAmeer:
You must also notice that the process of choosing a khalifah is done by the process of mutual consultation. Now the mechanics of HOW such a 'mutual consultation' be done is left for the Muslims to decide as time is dynamic in nature and it is not necessary that a plebiscite always be the ONLY way to elect a leader. For example, if there is an ongoing external conflict that is sapping the resources of the state then it is quite ridiculous to expect an "election year". It is because of the dynamic nature of time and situations that the modus operandi was left to the Muslims to decide what was best according to their times.
Even in the case of Abu Bakr's (RA) election as Khalifah you will note that Hazrat Umar was asked by someone what was the biggest FITNAH that he experienced in his lifetime and he mentioned that it was the election of Abu Bakr as Khalifah!! He goes on to state that it was the larger-than-life image of Abu Bakr that controlled the situation. Meaning to say that Abu Bakr's position was so unanimously accepted that none of the Sahabah would have argued on him being the successor. Otherwise had it been any other figure, Umar went on, then there could have been a big disagreement on who should have led!
You must also notice that the process of choosing a khalifah is done by the process of mutual consultation. Now the mechanics of HOW such a 'mutual consultation' be done is left for the Muslims to decide as time is dynamic in nature and it is not necessary that a plebiscite always be the ONLY way to elect a leader. For example, if there is an ongoing external conflict that is sapping the resources of the state then it is quite ridiculous to expect an "election year". It is because of the dynamic nature of time and situations that the modus operandi was left to the Muslims to decide what was best according to their times.
Even in the case of Abu Bakr's (RA) election as Khalifah you will note that Hazrat Umar was asked by someone what was the biggest FITNAH that he experienced in his lifetime and he mentioned that it was the election of Abu Bakr as Khalifah!! He goes on to state that it was the larger-than-life image of Abu Bakr that controlled the situation. Meaning to say that Abu Bakr's position was so unanimously accepted that none of the Sahabah would have argued on him being the successor. Otherwise had it been any other figure, Umar went on, then there could have been a big disagreement on who should have led!
Last edited:
indigo
Siasat.pk - Blogger
You are saying shura 'mutual consultation'or referendum is the basic method and other methods are exceptional?
[MENTION=23969]indigo[/MENTION]:
"mutual consultation" is not necessarily a referendum. Like I said, the modus operandi is open to interpretation and for the muslims to decide what works best. It could be a referendum; a Presidential election process (like in the US); a representative/parliament styled election process (such as what we have in Pakistan); or even dictatorial (if the conditions at the time dictate as such) etc. None of these processes are haram/halal. Rather all these methods are mubah (acceptable and neutral).
It is preferable that in normal conditions one has a majlis-e-shura that elects the Khalifah. This is closest to the best way, but not the ONLY way to do it. For example, if you have a situation where the Majlis ash-shura is attacked by a B2 bomber and everyone in the shura dies in it and the nation goes into a state of war, then we cant expect a majlis ash-shura to be re-elected all over again and then that majlis deciding who should be its leader.
Different situations demand different methods. That is why, what Dr. Tahirul Qadri is saying right now (of uprooting the present system and having a new majlis-e-shura) can start gaining a lot of acceptability if the present form of democracy fails to deliver good governance and credible leadership.
"mutual consultation" is not necessarily a referendum. Like I said, the modus operandi is open to interpretation and for the muslims to decide what works best. It could be a referendum; a Presidential election process (like in the US); a representative/parliament styled election process (such as what we have in Pakistan); or even dictatorial (if the conditions at the time dictate as such) etc. None of these processes are haram/halal. Rather all these methods are mubah (acceptable and neutral).
It is preferable that in normal conditions one has a majlis-e-shura that elects the Khalifah. This is closest to the best way, but not the ONLY way to do it. For example, if you have a situation where the Majlis ash-shura is attacked by a B2 bomber and everyone in the shura dies in it and the nation goes into a state of war, then we cant expect a majlis ash-shura to be re-elected all over again and then that majlis deciding who should be its leader.
Different situations demand different methods. That is why, what Dr. Tahirul Qadri is saying right now (of uprooting the present system and having a new majlis-e-shura) can start gaining a lot of acceptability if the present form of democracy fails to deliver good governance and credible leadership.
[MENTION=24375]AsifAmeer[/MENTION]
Aleph has provided a good summed up description of all that happened. I would like to re-assert on the point of giving imamat of namaz to AbuBakr R.A as each action of Muhammad pbuh was what Allah wanted to show Muslims and each thing was an indication of something so it was enough for the likes of geniuses that were present there (and who had more intellect than Ali R.A himself) to ascertain who was to be Khalifah but to make an example of the process for us, they did it all over again.
Now about assassinations, you can see it that the dream of zion that has lived forever was present at that time too and the very first suicide attacker was abu lu' lu' feroz who attacked and caused the martyrdom of Umar R.A and it went on from then onward. The war has always been there and will always be there till an end is put to it.
jews have always possessed greater abilities to create havoc with just some words and it exactly happened in this case where this misconception was created.
Aleph has provided a good summed up description of all that happened. I would like to re-assert on the point of giving imamat of namaz to AbuBakr R.A as each action of Muhammad pbuh was what Allah wanted to show Muslims and each thing was an indication of something so it was enough for the likes of geniuses that were present there (and who had more intellect than Ali R.A himself) to ascertain who was to be Khalifah but to make an example of the process for us, they did it all over again.
Now about assassinations, you can see it that the dream of zion that has lived forever was present at that time too and the very first suicide attacker was abu lu' lu' feroz who attacked and caused the martyrdom of Umar R.A and it went on from then onward. The war has always been there and will always be there till an end is put to it.
jews have always possessed greater abilities to create havoc with just some words and it exactly happened in this case where this misconception was created.
I couldnt thank you enough mate.
I even made a record of your post in my kindle!
Yar can you shed brief light on the conspiracy behind the Shahadah of Usmaan RA?
I even made a record of your post in my kindle!
Yar can you shed brief light on the conspiracy behind the Shahadah of Usmaan RA?
[MENTION=24375]AsifAmeer[/MENTION]:
Kindle? I just googled that and I had no idea such a thing existed! I am so sorely lagging in technology that it's not even funny!
About Uthman (RA) then it is a very complicated case that requires a lot of explanation. In any event I will try to explain it in a nutshell (and I hope you bear in mind that I will inadvertantly skip over a lot of details that might be important).
Uthman (RA) was an astute businessman and belonged to the Banu Umayyah clan (one of the subtribes of the Quraysh). He was also a very good 'economist' and very 'libertarian' in his outlook (to use some contemporary words). A lot of the economic success seen in the times of Sayyiduna Umar (RA) were actually the economic policies of Sayyiduna Uthman (RA). However, unlike Uthman ibn Affan, Hazrat Umar was a conservative in both his economic policies and his political outlook. One of the reasons why Hazrat Umar maintained the order and peace in his times was because of his conservative approach. Therefore, Hazrat Umar (RA) was more tight with the state treasury as compared to Hazrat Uthman, who allowed more borrowing in developmental work. Hazrat Uthman (RA) also allowed more political space to rebellious views as opposed to Hazrat Umar (something that would eventually lead to his downfall).
Now, given the above 2 salient features of Uthman's Caliphate (liberal economic policies + political freedom), Hazrat Uthman enstated governors who would help implement his economic policies. Hazrat Uthman's first 6 years (out of 12 years) of rule REMARKABLE economic expansion and wealth creation. So much so, that it was in his caliphate that the first Muslim navy was established. You might also be interested to know that the Hui tribe in China (Hui is Chinese for Husseini) had converted to Islam due to the first Muslim missionaries sent to spread Islam in China (during the rule of the Tang dynasty). The Huis are the indigineous Chinese (unlike Uyghurs) and one of the five main tribes of China as represented in the Chinese flag (the 5 stars). To date they trace their roots to Hazrat Uthman (RA).
Ok, back to the economics of Hazrat Uthman: So as the Islamic lands saw unprecedented growth, communities started seeing prosperity and huge job creation. However, as Hazrat Uthman was liberal in his policies, he allowed his governors to accept gifts from communities. This was something that Hazrat Umar (RA) had strictly forbidden in his times (which led to other complications, which I will skip for now). So Uthman (RA) thought it best for his governors to accept certain gifts from tribal leaders etc. He himself NEVER accepted any gifts as he was himself strict on himself in this matter (and he was very affluent to start with). But he didn't impose his piety on people whom he knew would be tempted. So as long as they declared their wealth and their gifts he was fine.
The rebellion was initially started from this point. The governor of Egypt (ibn Abi Sarh) had some accusations made against him for taking bribes from leaders of Egyptian tribes and some other pious individuals who were located in Egypt. Hazrat Uthman appointed Abdullah ibn Sa'ad to investigate. However, these people who were levelling these accusations soon started organizing themselves as they 'intercepted' an alleged letter from Uthman that talked of crushing the leaders of these petitioners. So started skirmishes with the governor of Egypt. When things started getting a little out of hand, Hazrat Uthman summoned all his governors (as some charges were now being levelled on other governors as well) to Madinah to investigate matters. It is at this point that the rebels in Egypt, under the leadership of Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfah, took over Egypt in a coup d'etat. This is where everything went terribly wrong.
Just so that you know the complexity of this whole mess, Muhammad ibn Abu Hudhayfah was the adopted son of Hazrat Uthman (RA) who had now turned against him (due to the contents of the alleged letter)! He was further being backed by Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr (who was the son of Hazrat Abu Bakr and also the foster son of Hazrat Ali)! Abdullah ibn Sa'ad had earlier wanted to crush their rebellion (after he came back with his initial report) when it was still in its infancy, but Hazrat Uthman, being the libertarian that he was, commanded Abdullah not to DARE shed Muslim blood. It was at this time that Hazrat Mu'aweyah (who was also from the Banu Umayyah and a cousin of Hazrat Uthman) the governor of Syria, sent out a message saying that he would send his army to Madinah to protect Uthman as matters were getting out of hand in Egypt and the rebels had started sending people to Madinah as they had decided to now assasinate Uthman (RA) and confront him with a 'charge sheet' of all his 'corruption and tyrannical governors'. Hazrat Uthman forbade Hazrat Mu'aweyah to send any army to Madinah as he didnt want bloodshed between Muslims and further complicate matters as a Syrian army would be seen as outsiders by people of Madinah who were neutral in all of this.
In any event, a delegation of 1,000 Egyptian rebels arrived in Madinah and Hazrat Uthman started countering their 'charge sheet' one by one in Masjid An-Nabawi. This happened quite a few times until some of the Medinites started getting frustrated with these rebels (who were now sending in more people to Madinah) for disrupting the khutbahs of Hazrat Uthman in Masjid Nabawi and making it a 'munazarah'. So fists flew, swords came out and stones were pelted at one another inside the masjid! Hazrat Uthman was hit on his head by one of the stones and he fell unconscious and was taken to his home on a stretcher.
By now, the rebels had started openly declaring that they wanted a replacement and that Uthman was not acceptable to them. They started to give their bay'ah to different persons all of whom TURNED THEM DOWN and in turn labeled them as rebels! Some of the person they went to as replacements were Hazrat Ali, Hazrat Talha and Hazrat Zubair. Ali and Zubair were so angry at this point that they sent their sons (Hasan ibn Ali, Hussain ibn Ali, and Abdullah ibn Zubair) along with a few others to guard the house of Uthman (RA) to prevent these rebels from murdering Uthman. The first attack by the rebels on Hazrat Uthman was repelled by the defenders of Uthman's house, which resulted also in the wounding of Hazrat Hasan.
The rebels then tried the next night - this time more stealthily - and managed to jump into the house of Uthman unnoticed. By the time they got in and attacked Uthman (RA), his wives had been wounded (one lost her fingers on one hand) and when Hasan, Hussain, Abdullah, Marwan et al moved in after hearing the screams, it was all too late. Uthman (RA) had been stabbed and slashed several times and lay dead in a pool of his and his family's blood.
Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr was one of the persons who had managed to jump into Uthman's house and just before he was dealt severe blows, he had held Uthman (RA) by his beard (imagine, an 83-year old man!) and shouted at with expletives. Hazrat Uthman (RA) looked at him and told him how he had been misguided and how his own father had respect for the beard and the man that he was today looking to slay. Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr at this point snapped out of his emotions and realized what sin he and his friends were committing as he saw the wives of Uthman mutilated and Uthman himself being attacked. He tried to stop some of his rebel friends, but it was all too late.
Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr was misguided because when he had originally sent complaints against ibn Abi Sarh's misappropriation of funds and tyranny, he was under the impression that Uthman (RA) had rejected his complaint and in turn sent orders to have Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr killed! This was because a letter was intercepted by Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr's men stating as such. However, this letter was a fake document created by some unscrupulous go-betweens to flame the fire of internal discord. Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and ibn Abi Hudhayfah later repented for their behavior and realized how they had fallen into a trap.
Kindle? I just googled that and I had no idea such a thing existed! I am so sorely lagging in technology that it's not even funny!
About Uthman (RA) then it is a very complicated case that requires a lot of explanation. In any event I will try to explain it in a nutshell (and I hope you bear in mind that I will inadvertantly skip over a lot of details that might be important).
Uthman (RA) was an astute businessman and belonged to the Banu Umayyah clan (one of the subtribes of the Quraysh). He was also a very good 'economist' and very 'libertarian' in his outlook (to use some contemporary words). A lot of the economic success seen in the times of Sayyiduna Umar (RA) were actually the economic policies of Sayyiduna Uthman (RA). However, unlike Uthman ibn Affan, Hazrat Umar was a conservative in both his economic policies and his political outlook. One of the reasons why Hazrat Umar maintained the order and peace in his times was because of his conservative approach. Therefore, Hazrat Umar (RA) was more tight with the state treasury as compared to Hazrat Uthman, who allowed more borrowing in developmental work. Hazrat Uthman (RA) also allowed more political space to rebellious views as opposed to Hazrat Umar (something that would eventually lead to his downfall).
Now, given the above 2 salient features of Uthman's Caliphate (liberal economic policies + political freedom), Hazrat Uthman enstated governors who would help implement his economic policies. Hazrat Uthman's first 6 years (out of 12 years) of rule REMARKABLE economic expansion and wealth creation. So much so, that it was in his caliphate that the first Muslim navy was established. You might also be interested to know that the Hui tribe in China (Hui is Chinese for Husseini) had converted to Islam due to the first Muslim missionaries sent to spread Islam in China (during the rule of the Tang dynasty). The Huis are the indigineous Chinese (unlike Uyghurs) and one of the five main tribes of China as represented in the Chinese flag (the 5 stars). To date they trace their roots to Hazrat Uthman (RA).
Ok, back to the economics of Hazrat Uthman: So as the Islamic lands saw unprecedented growth, communities started seeing prosperity and huge job creation. However, as Hazrat Uthman was liberal in his policies, he allowed his governors to accept gifts from communities. This was something that Hazrat Umar (RA) had strictly forbidden in his times (which led to other complications, which I will skip for now). So Uthman (RA) thought it best for his governors to accept certain gifts from tribal leaders etc. He himself NEVER accepted any gifts as he was himself strict on himself in this matter (and he was very affluent to start with). But he didn't impose his piety on people whom he knew would be tempted. So as long as they declared their wealth and their gifts he was fine.
The rebellion was initially started from this point. The governor of Egypt (ibn Abi Sarh) had some accusations made against him for taking bribes from leaders of Egyptian tribes and some other pious individuals who were located in Egypt. Hazrat Uthman appointed Abdullah ibn Sa'ad to investigate. However, these people who were levelling these accusations soon started organizing themselves as they 'intercepted' an alleged letter from Uthman that talked of crushing the leaders of these petitioners. So started skirmishes with the governor of Egypt. When things started getting a little out of hand, Hazrat Uthman summoned all his governors (as some charges were now being levelled on other governors as well) to Madinah to investigate matters. It is at this point that the rebels in Egypt, under the leadership of Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfah, took over Egypt in a coup d'etat. This is where everything went terribly wrong.
Just so that you know the complexity of this whole mess, Muhammad ibn Abu Hudhayfah was the adopted son of Hazrat Uthman (RA) who had now turned against him (due to the contents of the alleged letter)! He was further being backed by Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr (who was the son of Hazrat Abu Bakr and also the foster son of Hazrat Ali)! Abdullah ibn Sa'ad had earlier wanted to crush their rebellion (after he came back with his initial report) when it was still in its infancy, but Hazrat Uthman, being the libertarian that he was, commanded Abdullah not to DARE shed Muslim blood. It was at this time that Hazrat Mu'aweyah (who was also from the Banu Umayyah and a cousin of Hazrat Uthman) the governor of Syria, sent out a message saying that he would send his army to Madinah to protect Uthman as matters were getting out of hand in Egypt and the rebels had started sending people to Madinah as they had decided to now assasinate Uthman (RA) and confront him with a 'charge sheet' of all his 'corruption and tyrannical governors'. Hazrat Uthman forbade Hazrat Mu'aweyah to send any army to Madinah as he didnt want bloodshed between Muslims and further complicate matters as a Syrian army would be seen as outsiders by people of Madinah who were neutral in all of this.
In any event, a delegation of 1,000 Egyptian rebels arrived in Madinah and Hazrat Uthman started countering their 'charge sheet' one by one in Masjid An-Nabawi. This happened quite a few times until some of the Medinites started getting frustrated with these rebels (who were now sending in more people to Madinah) for disrupting the khutbahs of Hazrat Uthman in Masjid Nabawi and making it a 'munazarah'. So fists flew, swords came out and stones were pelted at one another inside the masjid! Hazrat Uthman was hit on his head by one of the stones and he fell unconscious and was taken to his home on a stretcher.
By now, the rebels had started openly declaring that they wanted a replacement and that Uthman was not acceptable to them. They started to give their bay'ah to different persons all of whom TURNED THEM DOWN and in turn labeled them as rebels! Some of the person they went to as replacements were Hazrat Ali, Hazrat Talha and Hazrat Zubair. Ali and Zubair were so angry at this point that they sent their sons (Hasan ibn Ali, Hussain ibn Ali, and Abdullah ibn Zubair) along with a few others to guard the house of Uthman (RA) to prevent these rebels from murdering Uthman. The first attack by the rebels on Hazrat Uthman was repelled by the defenders of Uthman's house, which resulted also in the wounding of Hazrat Hasan.
The rebels then tried the next night - this time more stealthily - and managed to jump into the house of Uthman unnoticed. By the time they got in and attacked Uthman (RA), his wives had been wounded (one lost her fingers on one hand) and when Hasan, Hussain, Abdullah, Marwan et al moved in after hearing the screams, it was all too late. Uthman (RA) had been stabbed and slashed several times and lay dead in a pool of his and his family's blood.
Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr was one of the persons who had managed to jump into Uthman's house and just before he was dealt severe blows, he had held Uthman (RA) by his beard (imagine, an 83-year old man!) and shouted at with expletives. Hazrat Uthman (RA) looked at him and told him how he had been misguided and how his own father had respect for the beard and the man that he was today looking to slay. Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr at this point snapped out of his emotions and realized what sin he and his friends were committing as he saw the wives of Uthman mutilated and Uthman himself being attacked. He tried to stop some of his rebel friends, but it was all too late.
Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr was misguided because when he had originally sent complaints against ibn Abi Sarh's misappropriation of funds and tyranny, he was under the impression that Uthman (RA) had rejected his complaint and in turn sent orders to have Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr killed! This was because a letter was intercepted by Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr's men stating as such. However, this letter was a fake document created by some unscrupulous go-betweens to flame the fire of internal discord. Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and ibn Abi Hudhayfah later repented for their behavior and realized how they had fallen into a trap.
Here is a paragraph about Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and his repentance at his involvement in the siege of Uthman (RA). I found this off of Wikipedia:
Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr was a pious Muslim who supported the Rightly Guided Caliph, Ali ibn Abi Talib. He had spent considerable time in Egypt and was part of the delegation that complained about the activities of the governor of Egypt to the third Caliph Uthman ibn Affan. The Caliph promised to immediately dismiss the Egyptian governor and replace him with Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr. However, after sensing betrayal from Uthman (but actually perpetrated by Marwan ibn al-Hakam) against the Muslim petitioners from Egypt, ibn Abi Bakr rushed back with the petitioners to Madinah where he initially took part in the uprising against Uthman. After realizing his error in getting involved in the Siege of Uthman, he repented and withdrew from the uprising, although he had already led the group of rebels inside Uthman's residence.
The history is related as follows:
Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr was a pious Muslim who supported the Rightly Guided Caliph, Ali ibn Abi Talib. He had spent considerable time in Egypt and was part of the delegation that complained about the activities of the governor of Egypt to the third Caliph Uthman ibn Affan. The Caliph promised to immediately dismiss the Egyptian governor and replace him with Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr. However, after sensing betrayal from Uthman (but actually perpetrated by Marwan ibn al-Hakam) against the Muslim petitioners from Egypt, ibn Abi Bakr rushed back with the petitioners to Madinah where he initially took part in the uprising against Uthman. After realizing his error in getting involved in the Siege of Uthman, he repented and withdrew from the uprising, although he had already led the group of rebels inside Uthman's residence.
The history is related as follows:
A group of seven hundred Egyptians came to complain to Caliph `Uthman about their governor Ibn Abi Sarh’s tyranny, so `Uthman said: "Choose someone to govern you." They chose Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr, so `Uthman wrote credentials for him and they returned. On their way back, at three days’ distance from Madinah, a messenger caught up with them with the news that he carried orders from `Uthman to the governor of Egypt. They searched him and found a message from `Uthman to ibn Abi Sarh ordering the death of Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and some of his friends. They returned to Madinah and besieged `Uthman. `Uthman acknowledged that the camel, the slave, and the seal on the letter belonged to him, but he swore that he had never written nor ordered the letter to be written. It was discovered that the letter had been hand-written by Marwan ibn al-Hakam.
