Morocco's Islamic Groups Fail To Refer To Islam

[stanley]

MOROCCO'S ISLAMIC GROUPS FAIL TO REFER TO ISLAM

23/06/2005
BY Tariq Nasrullah

Voice of Ummah - www.voiceofummah.net

There is currently a plethora of 'Islamic' groups who are ironically failing to refer to Islam. For example in a recent interview granted to the weekly "Al Ousbouya Al Jadida", Nadia Yassine shamelessly called for a republican regime to replace the monarchy in Morocco. Daughter of Abdessalam Yassine (leader of the 'Islamic' movement Al Adl Wal Ihsane in Morocco), she is now suffering a backlash from other so called 'Islamic' groups within Morocco. Unfortunately their stance has been equally ridiculous as they subserviently defend the monarchical system. Up until now not one of these 'Islamic' groups has referred to Islam and the necessity for Morocco to adopt the Islamic ruling system, in fact they have openly contradicted it.

Firstly the framework of the Islamic ruling system is not monarchical and nor does it have anything in common with it.
1) The monarchical system of government adopts a hereditary rule; sons inherit the throne from their fathers, and they inherit their legacies.

- In Islam, there is no hereditary rule; the rule is performed by who the Ummah gives her bayah of allegiance to willingly and selectively.

2) The monarchical system allows the monarch special privileges and rights exclusive to him. He is above the law and is answerable to none while at the same time is the symbol of the country. Thus monarchs such as the kings of Saudi Arabia, and Jordan as well as Morocco make themselves the source of law, while abandoning the Islamic Shari'ah and torturing and imprisoning those who struggle for it. This is categorically forbidden in Islam.

- The Islamic system does not allow the Khaleefah or the Imam any special privileges or rights. He has the same equal rights and duties of every single individual of the Ummah and is not their symbol. He is forbidden from running the people’s affairs as he pleases; rather he is a trustee (representative) of the Ummah in rule and in authority. It is the Ummah that select him and give him the bayah of allegiance to implement upon her Allah SWT's Shari’ah. The Khaleefah is guided and restricted in his actions by the Islamic Shari’ah unlike the monarchs in the Muslim world who use 'Islamic' slogans to manipulate the Ummah and serve the interests of their master, the United States of America.

The Islamic ruling system is not republican either as the republican system is based on the democratic regime, where the sovereignty is to the people.
1) In the republican system the people have the right to rule and legislate, they reserve the right to appoint the ruler and depose him. They reserve the right to adopt a constitution and enact new laws, abolish, alter or modify them.

- This is in complete contradiction to the Islamic ruling system which is based on the Islamic Aqeedah and gives the sovereignty to the Shari’ah of Allah SWT and not to the people (Ummah). Neither the Ummah nor the Khaleefah have the right to legislate, rather the sole legislator is the Allmighty Allah SWT. The Khaleefah has only the right to adopt the rules which are derived from the Qur'an and the Sunnah. In addition while the Ummah have the right to appoint the Khaleefah they don't have the right to remove him; what removes him is the Islamic Shari’ah. Indeed he is removed only if he violates the Shari’ah in such a way that the court of Unjust Acts deems it deserving of his removal. Therefore in Islam the authority belongs to the Ummah, who is represented by a Khaleefah who she selects and gives the bayah to.

2) In the Presidential framework of the Republican system, the president of the republic takes up the mandatory powers of the head of state and prime minister. His cabinet is without a prime minister, but instead secretaries of state, as in the U.S. In the parliamentary framework, the president has a prime minister, and the mandatory ruling powers are in the hands of the ministerial cabinet not the president of the republic as in France and Germany.

- In the Islamic System there are no ministers or council of ministers working with the Khaleefah. Unlike the democratic system, where ministers have special portfolios and mandatory powers of their own, Islam determines that the Khaleefah has assistants who work and assist him with the executive duties. Thus the Khaleefah heads them in his capacity as the head of state and not as a prime minister or head of an executive body. The Khaleefah has no council of ministers working with him and has all the mandatory powers whereby his assistants help him to execute those mandatory powers.

3) In the republican system, whether it is presidential or parliamentary, the term of the presidency is fixed and cannot be exceeded.

The Islamic system on the other hand does not determine the Khaleefah’s term of office. The term is determined by the implementation of the Shari’ah, for as long as the Khaleefah is implementing the Islamic rules to the full, he remains a Khaleefah in office, regardless of how long his Khilafah term lasts. If the Khaleefah violated the Shari’ah, and deviated from implementing the Islamic rules, his term in office would be terminated even if it were for one month, or one day; he must be removed.

We sincerely ask the Islamic Ummah and her 'representatives' to be aware of the Islamic System and to avoid referring to anything that violates it. It is imperative that we are not supporting or calling for that which is in line with the Kufr American agenda i.e. the Republican system, or that which aids our treacherous, tyrannical rulers i.e. the Monarchical system. The only suitable system for the Islamic Ummah to live and die for is the system revealed to us by Allah SWT, the Islamic System – the only system capable of truly salvaging mankind from its current misery and enslavement.

[faqir]

[SIZE=4]
1) The monarchical system of government adopts a hereditary rule; sons inherit the throne from their fathers, and they inherit their legacies.

- In Islam, there is no hereditary rule; the rule is performed by who the Ummah gives her bayah of allegiance to willingly and selectively.

Monarchy was the norm for hundreds of years in the Khilafah was it not? In fact, is it not even predicted in various well known hadith of the Prophet salallahu alayhi wasalam? As for giving bay'ah, then it can be given to the monarch as well, no?

[faqir]

as for the rest of the article, i don't see your article producing a single evidence for the form of government which must be adopted by an islamic state. [obviously everyone agrees that the laws must be in accordance to the shariah - i am not referring to this]

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

salams

i agree that moniarchal systems are not ideal and not the method of the sahaba and the rightly-guided khulafa, who are the optimum.

however, thats not to say, as sidi faqir stated, a moniarchal system is in itself haram, as long shari'a is established. the problem lies in the fact that the son or heir maybe completley pathetic.

mu'awiyah handed power to his son, and we don't lower our reverence for him, because this was his ijtihad - even though his son didn't provide the credentials.

as for the moroccan leadership, faults aside, they have done more for the preservation of traditional islam than many of the other leaders. this is why the maliki maddhab still reigns supreme in that country and sufi zawiya's and dhikrs continue to this day, even though the country has been bombarded with 'salafi dawah'. the masjids are shining examples of the maliki adhan and prayer.

monarchy is not ideal, but hey - we can make compromise if shari'a is established and the counsel of the ulama is taken.

[stanley]

jazakallah khayran brothers for your reply.
In brief - our example of the islamic ruling system should be taken from the Prophet Muhammed Pbuh and the noble companions.

With regards to the hereditary khulafaa as practiced by the ummayads, Abassids and Uthmanis this indeed was an abuse of the bayah. Despite this the bayah was still legitimate as the Ummah had consented to the new khalif's appointment thus the authority had remained with the Ummah. It is well known for instance that the Sheikh ul Islam in the time of the Uthmanis would physically give the bayah to the new khalif on behalf of the Islamic Ummah. it is also well known that even Mua'wiyyah had to go to Makkah to beg for the consent from the Ummah to accept Yazid as the next khalif.

With regards to our current situation - none of these 'monarchs' are applicable as the khalifs despite abusing the bayah - had still implemented Islam wholistically - this is in stark contrast to the American servants who are openly fighting those who call for the rule of Allah to be established.

i am sure you are aware of the terrible treatment of muslims in Morocco who are kidnapped and left in the middle of the Sahara desert to die after calling for the islamic way of life. May Allah SWT bless us soon with a sincere leadership - a leadership that implements islam - Ameen

[faqir]

jazakallah khayran brothers for your reply.
In brief - our example of the islamic ruling system should be taken from the Prophet Muhammed Pbuh and the noble companions.

Have you got any textual evidence from the qur'an and authentic Sunnah illustrating what this system was exactly and where the obligation upon the nations that follow to implement it in the same form come from? [Please note: I am not disputing that our laws should be in accordance with the shariah - I am merely asking for proof regarding the form that the government must take]

By the way, I agree with you that the hereditary system may not have been ideal but it is again proven from the authentic ahadith that this system of monarchy would come to pass. SEE: Monarchy in Qur'an and Hadith http://www.livingislam.org/fiqhi/fiqha_e39.html

So again, I ask you for a clear text from our Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasalam explaining the exact form that an islamic government must take and the proof that it is an obligation upon those who followed hundreds of years later to implement this same exact system.

JazakAllah khair.

[ilm_seeker]

As sallamu alaikum

In brief - our example of the islamic ruling system should be taken from the Prophet Muhammed and the noble companions.

Have you got any textual evidence from the qur'an and authentic Sunnah illustrating what this system was exactly and where the obligation upon the nations that follow to implement it in the same form come from?

Br. faqir, what's wrong with Br. Stanly's sayings? Are Muslims not told to behave in accorance with the Sunnah of Rasulullah and the Khulafa-e-Rasidoon?

Wa alaikum as sallam

[ahsanirfan]

As sallamu alaikum





Br. faqir, what's wrong with Br. Stanly's sayings? Are Muslims not told to behave in accorance with the Sunnah of Rasulullah and the Khulafa-e-Rasidoon?

Wa alaikum as sallam

The question is: Do we know the Sunnah?

[ilm_seeker]

The question is: Do we know the Sunnah?

As sallamu alaikum

The traditional approach. The way of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama'ah. That is the Sunnah. Are you implying that the Ummah has become so currupt that we don't follow the Sunnah and we have become distant from our Deen?

Suffice to say the model of the Khulufa-e-Rashideen (Radi Allahu Anhum) is the Islamic way of governance. It's up to the Ulem ato explain this further and explain the fiqh behind it. This is what I implied.

Wa alaikum as asllam

[Mossy]

Hmm, so does the method of governance that applies to thousands of people scale up to work with millions? Is there any indication that this is the case, or is adaptation required?