It's been over seven months, with 45,000+ civilians killed in P41estine the majority of whom are women and children. Similarly with Muslims worldwide (Burma, Kashmir, Uygurs in East Turkestan etc..), and the silence of "Muslim" rulers is deafening. The only solution is for Muslims to mobilize their armies and unite under a single umbrella of Khilafah, which is the promise of Allah SWT. If you are in a position of power, please raise your voice. If you can't do much, please consider donating to Palestine Red Crescent Society or any other charity organisations which you truly trust, JazakAllah khairan.

Constitution (191)

The Khalifah’s adoption is restricted by the Shari’ah rules; he is prohibited to adopt any rule which is not derived according to a legitimate deduction from the Shari’ah evidences, and he is restricted with what he adopted of the rules, and by what he bound himself to with respect to the method of derivation. So he is not permitted to adopt a rule which has been derived according to a methodology which contradicts the methodology he adopted, and he cannot give an order which contradicts the rules that he had adopted.

There are two issues in this article: the first being that the Khalifah is restricted in the adoption of rules to adopting from the Shari’ah rules; in other words, he is restricted by the Islamic Shari’ah in legislation and enacting laws. Therefore, it is not permitted for him to adopt anything which contradicts that since they would be the rules of Kufr (disbelief); if he adopted rules from other than the Islamic rules, and he knew that what he had adopted was something other than the Islamic Shari’ah, then the words of Allah (swt)

“And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers.” (TMQ 5:44) apply to him, so if he believed in the rule that he had adopted, then he would commit disbelief and apostatise from Islam. If he did not believe in it, but he took it upon the basis that it did not contradict Islam, in the same manner that the Ottoman Khulafaa’ acted during their final days, then it would be forbidden for him but he wouldn’t commit disbelief. If he had a semblance of an evidence, such as the one who legislates a rule which has no evidence, due to a benefit that he thinks is there, and relies upon the rule of Al-Masalih Al-Mursalah, or the “preventing the means” or “the means of the actions” or anything similar, then if he thought that these rules were Shari’ah rules and evidences, it wouldn’t be forbidden for him and nor would he commit disbelief. However, he is mistaken, and what he has derived is considered a Shari’ah rule by all of the Muslims, and it is obligatory to obey it if the Khalifah adopts it, since it is a Shari’ah rule, and it would have a semblance of an evidence even if he was mistaken in the evidence, since he is like the one who is mistaken in the deduction from the evidences. In any case, it is obligatory for the Khalifah to restrict his adoption to the Islamic Shari’ah, and to restrict himself to adoption of Shari’ah rules derived by a correct deduction from the Shari’ah evidences. The evidence for this:

Firstly: What Allah (swt) obligated upon every Muslim, whether they were the Khalifah or not, to conduct all of their actions according to the Shari’ah rules; Allah (swt) says

 

“But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves.” (TMQ 4:65). Conducting the actions according to the Shari’ah rules necessitates the adoption of a specific rule when there are a number of understandings of the address of the Legislator; in other words, when the Shari’ah rule is numerous. So adoption of a specific rule in those issues where there are a number of opinions is obligatory upon the Muslim when he wants to undertake the action, in other words, when he wants to apply the rule, and so it is obligatory upon the Khalifah when he wants to carry out his action and that is the rule.

Secondly: The text of the pledge of allegiance which the Khalifah is contracted upon, obliges him to adhere to the Islamic Shari’ah, since it is a pledge upon the Book and the Sunnah, and so it is not permitted for him to leave these two - rather whoever intentionally goes outside these two commits disbelief and if it was unintentional then he would be sinful.

Thirdly: The Khalifah is appointed in order to implement the Shari’ah, and so it is not permitted for him to implement anything from outside the Shari’ah upon the Muslims, since the Shari’ah prohibits such an action in a decisive manner which reaches the level whereby the one who implements other than Islam has their Iman negated, which is an indication for it being decisively prohibited. This means that the Khalifah is restricted in his adoption of the rules, in other words, in his drafting of the laws according to the Shari’ah rules alone, and if he drafts any laws based upon anything else, then he will commit disbelief if he believes in it, and will be sinful if he doesn’t.

These three evidences are the proof for the first issue in this article. As for the second issue of the article which is that the Khalifah is restricted by what he has adopted and by what he adheres to in terms of a method of deduction, the proof for this is that the Shari’ah rule which the Khalifah implements is the Shari’ah rule for him, and not for others; in other words, the Shari’ah rule which he adopted in order for his actions to proceed in accordance with and not any Shari’ah rule. So if the Khalifah deduced a rule, or followed someone else in it, that Shari’ah rule would be the rule of Allah (swt) for him, and he would be restricted by this Shari’ah rule in his adoption of it for the Muslims. It would not be permitted for him to adopt anything different to it, since it would not be considered to be the rule of Allah (swt) for him, because it would not be a Shari’ah rule with respect to him, and accordingly it would not be a Shari’ah rule with respect to the Muslims. Therefore, his orders that he issued for the sake of the subjects would be restricted according to this Shari’ah rule which he had adopted, and it is not permitted for him to issue orders which contradict whatever he had adopted from the rules. This is because that order which he issued would not be considered the rule of Allah (swt) for him, and so would not be considered a Shari’ah rule with respect to him, and then it would not be a Shari’ah rule in respect to the Muslims, in which case, it would be as though he had issued an order which was not based upon the Shari’ah rule. Due to this, it is not permitted for him to issue any order which contradicts what he adopted from the rules.

Also, the method of deduction causes a change in the understanding of the Shari’ah rule, so if the Khalifah considered the Illah to be a Shari’ah Illah if it is derived from a Shari’ah text, and he does not think that Maslahah is a Shari’ah Illah, and he does not consider Al-Masalih Al-Mursalah to be a Shari’ah evidence, then it means that he has specified a method of deduction for himself. In which case, it would be obligatory for him to be restricted by it, and it would not be correct for him to adopt a rule whose evidence was based upon Al-Masalih Al-Mursalah, or to take an analogy based upon an Illah which was not derived from a Shari’ah text, since that rule would not be considered a Shari’ah rule for him as he does not recognise its evidence as a Shari’ah evidence, in which case in his view, it would not be a Shari’ah rule. As long as it is not considered to be a Shari’ah rule for the Khalifah, then it would not be a Shari’ah rule for the Muslims and so it would be as if he adopted a rule from other than the Shari’ah rules, which is prohibited for him. If the Khalifah was a Muqallid (someone who follows another person’s Ijtihad), or a Mujtahid in an issue and not a Mujtahid Mutlaq or Mujtahid Madhhab, and he did not have a specific method of deduction, then he would be permitted to adopt any Shari’ah rule as long as it has an evidence, as long as that evidence is a semblance of an evidence; he would not be restricted by anything in his adoption of the rules but rather he would only be restricted by what he issued in terms of orders such that they should not be issued except according to what he had adopted from the rules.

The Khalifah possesses the following powers:

a. He is the one who adopts the Shari’ah rules derived by a correct Ijtihad from the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of his Messenger necessary for managing the affairs of the Ummah so that they become laws (Qawanin) which are obligatory to obey, and it is not permitted to oppose them.

b. He is responsible for governing the domestic and foreign affairs of the State, and he takes command of the Army; he has the right to announce war, to sign peace treaties, truces and all other types of agreements.

c. He is the one who can accept or reject foreign ambassadors and appoint and remove the Muslim ambassadors.

d. He is the one who appoints and removes the assistants and governors. They are all responsible to him as they are responsible to the Shura council.

e. He is the one who appoints and removes the head judge and judges with the exception of the Madhalim judge in the event of his looking into a case regarding the Khalifah, his assistants or his head judge. He also has the power to appoint and remove the department managers, the commanders of the army, and its generals. All of these are responsible to him and not to the Shura council.

f. He is the one who adopts the Shari’ah laws according to which the budget of the State is decided, beside the sections of the budget and the amounts allocated to each aspect, irrespective to whether it was related to revenue or expenditure.

With respect to the detailed evidences for the six paragraphs mentioned in the article:

The evidence for paragraph “a” is the Ijma’ of the companions, since the law (Qanun) is a technical term which means: The command which is issued by the authority in order to govern the people according to it; and it is also known as “the collection of rules which the authority imposes upon people to follow in their relations”, in other words, if the authority orders specific rules, these rules are laws which the people are bound by, and if the authority did not order them then they are not considered laws and the people are not bound by them. The Muslims act according to the rules of the Shari’ah and ,therefore, they act according to the orders and prohibitions of Allah (swt) and not the orders and prohibitions of the authority. So they act according to the rules of the Shari’ah and not the orders of the authority. But, these Shari’ah rules were differed over by the companions, so some of them understood something from the Shari’ah texts whereas others understood something different from them, and each of them proceeded according to what they had understood, and their understanding would be the rule of Allah (swt) for them.

However, there are Shari’ah rules that the Muslims would all have to proceed according to one opinion in order to facilitate the management of the affairs of the Ummah, as opposed to each one following their own Ijtihad. This actually happened; Abu Bakr (ra) thought that the wealth should be distributed amongst the Muslims equally, since it was their right collectively. As for Umar (ra), he thought that it was not correct to give the one who had previously fought against the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) the same as the ones who had fought alongside him, or to give the poor the same as the rich. However, Abu Bakr (ra) was the Khalifah and so ordered the implementation of his opinion, in other words, the adoption of the equal distribution of the wealth. The Muslims followed his opinion and the judges and governors acted according to it, and Umar (ra) submitted to the opinion of Abu Bakr (ra) and he acted according to it and implemented it. When Umar (ra) then became the Khalifah, he adopted an opinion which contradicted the opinion of Abu Bakr (ra); in other words, he ordered his opinion which was to distribute the wealth according to preference rather than equally. Therefore, he distributed the wealth according to those who embraced Islam earlier and according to need and the Muslims followed his opinion and the judges and governors acted according to it. So, there was an Ijma’ of the companions that the Imam could adopt specific rules and order their enactment, and that it was upon the Muslims to obey that even if it went against their own Ijtihad, and they had to leave acting according to their own opinions and Ijtihad. These adopted rules are the laws. Consequently, the passing of laws is for the Khalifah alone and no one else possesses that right at all.

As for paragraph “b”, its proof is the action of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) since he was the one who used to appoint the governors and the judges and account them, and he was the one who used to monitor the buying and selling, and prohibit cheating, and distribute the wealth amongst the people. He was also the one who used to help the one who was unemployed to find work and used to undertake all the domestic affairs of the State. In the same way, he used to address the Kings, meet the messengers and the delegations, and used to undertake all the foreign affairs of the State. Additionally, he used to practically undertake the leadership of the Army and so in the battles he would personally take leadership of the fighting. He was the one who sent the expeditions out and appointed their leaders. This was to the extent that he appointed Usama Bin Zaid as a leader over an expedition in order to send it to the land of As-Sham, even though the companions disapproved due to his young age, but the Messenger (pbuh) forced them to accept his leadership. This indicates that the Khalifah is the practical leader of the Army, and not merely the Commander in Chief alone. Additionally, it was the Messenger (pbuh) who declared the wars against the Quraysh, Bani Quraythah, Bani Al-Nadir, Bani Qaynuqa’, Khaybar and the Romans. Every war which occurred was declared by the Messenger (pbuh) , which indicates that the declaration of war is only for the Khalifah. He also contracted treaties with the Jews, and with Bani Mudlij and their allies from Bani Damrah, and he was the one who concluded the treaties with Yuhannatu b. Ruba, the companion of Ayla. He concluded the treaty of Hudaybiyah even though the Muslims were angry with it, but he did not refer to them and rejected their opinions and signed the treaty. All of which indicates that the Khalifah alone is the one who concludes the treaties, irrespective of whether it was a peace treaty or any other kind of agreement.

As for paragraph “c”, its evidence is that the Prophet (phuh) met the messengers of Musailama, and met Abu Raafi’ as a messenger from the Quraysh; he was the one who sent messengers to Heracules, Caesar, Al-Maqawqis (of Egypt), Al-Harith Al- Ghassani the king of Al-Hira, Al-Harith Al-Himiari the king of Yemen and to Najashi of the Abyssinians. He sent ‘Uthman Bin ‘Affan (ra) at Hudaybiyah as a messenger to the Quraysh. All of this indicates that the Khalifah is the one who accepts or rejects to meet the ambassadors and is the one who appoints them.

With respect to paragraph “d”, the Messenger (pbuh) used to appoint the governors; he appointed Mu’adh as a governor over Yemen. He was the one who used to remove the governors; he removed Al-‘Alaa Bin Al-Hadrami from Bahrain. Also, the reason why he removed Al-‘Alaa was due to the complaints of the people about him, which indicates that the governors are held responsible in front of the people they are governing in the same way they are held responsible in front of the Khalifah and in front of the Shura council since it represents all of the provinces. This is with respect to the governors. As for assistants, the Prophet (phuh) used to have two assistants, Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra), and he did not remove them nor appoint anyone other than them throughout his life. So he was the one who appointed them and did not remove them. However, since the assistant only takes his authority from the Khalifah, and he is his representative, then the Khalifah would have the right to remove him, proven by analogy to the one given proxy, since the one who gave proxy to someone has the right to remove it, unless there is a narrated text which prohibits removing him in special circumstances.

The proof for paragraph “e” is that the Messenger (pbuh) made Ali (ra) the judge for Yemen and in Al-Isti’ab that the Messenger (pbuh) appointed Mu’ath Bin Jabal as judge over Al-Janad, a province in Yeman.

Umar (ra) used to appoint and remove the judges; he appointed Shuraih as a judge over Kufa and Abu Musa as a judge over Basra, while he removed Sharahbeel Bin Hasana from his governorship over As-Sham, and appointed Mu’awiyah. So Sharahbeel said to him “Did you remove me due to cowardice, or treachery?” He replied “Neither of them, but I avoided embarrassment to appoint you while there is a man who is more powerful than you” as it was reported in the Musannaf of Abdul Razzaq. ‘Ali (ra) appointed Abu Aswad and then removed him, and so he asked “Why did you remove me and I did not betray you nor committed a crime”, so ‘Ali replied “I saw that you would disregard those who dispute in front of you”. Both Umar (ra) and ‘Ali (ra) did this within the sight and hearing of the companions, and none of them rebuked them over this. This is therefore, all evidence that the Khalifah has the right to appoint judges generally, and in the same way to appoint someone else to appoint the judges, analogous to appointing a proxy, since he is able to deputise all his mandatory powers to anyone in the same way that he is permitted to appoint anyone as a proxy for him in everything that he is permitted to carry out.

As for making an exception for the removal of the Madhalim judge while investigating a case raised against the Khalifah or his assistant or his head judge, this is due to the Shari’a rule “the means to something forbidden is also forbidden”, since giving the power to the Khalifah to remove him in this situation means that there would be an influence on the verdict of the judge, and additionally it would prevent an Islamic ruling, which is Haram. Placing the power to remove the Madhalim judge in the hands of the Khalifah is a means to this Haram, and especially since this rule relies upon most probably doubt and not certainty. For that reason the power to remove the Madhalim judge in this instance is left with the Madhalim court, and in other circumstances the rule remains on its origin which is that the right to appoint and remove belongs to the Khalifah.

With respect to the appointment of the department managers, the Messenger (pbuh) used to appoint registrars to administer the affairs, and they were equivalent to department managers. Al- Harith b. ‘Awf was appointed in charge of his seal; Mu’ayqib b. Abi Fatimah was appointed as registrar of the war booty; Huthaifa Bin Al-Yemaan used to register the yield of the crops in the Hijaz; Al-Zubayr b. Al-‘Awwam used to register the Zakat; and Al-Mugheera Bin Shu’ba used to register the debts and transactions, and so on.

As for the commanders of the Army, and the standard bearers, the Messenger (pbuh) appointed Hamza Bin Abdul Muttalib (ra) as a commander over thirty men in order to impede the Quraysh along the sea shore. ‘Ubaydah Ibn Al-Harith (ra) was appointed over sixty men and was sent to the Raabigh valley to face the Quraysh. Sa’ad Bin Abi Waqqas (ra) was appointed over twenty men and was then sent in the direction of Makkah. In the same manner he used to appoint the commander of the Army, all of which indicates that the Khalifah is the one who appoints the commanders and standard bearers.

All of these were responsible to the Messenger (pbuh) , and were not responsible to anyone else, thus indicating that the judges, department managers, commanders of the Army and the rest of the civil servants are not responsible except to the Khalifah, and they are not responsible to the Shura council. No one is responsible to the Shura council except for the assistants and governors, and in the same way the administrators, since they are all types of rulers. Other than these, no one else is responsible in front of the Shura council; rather they are all responsible in front of the Khalifah.

As for paragraph “f”, the various sections of revenues and expenditure of the budget of the State are limited by the Shari’ah rules, so no one is given a single Dinar unless it is due to them from a Shari’ah rule, and not a single Dinar is spent except according to the Shari’ah rule. However, the details of the expenditures, or what is known as the sections of the budget, are decided according to the opinion and Ijtihad of the Khalifah, and the same applies to the revenues. For example, he would decide that the tax from the Kharajiyyah land would be x amount, and that the Jizya to be taken should be y amount, and similar to these are the sections of the revenues. He is the one who would decide that x amount should be spent upon the roads, and y amount upon the hospitals, and so on across all the sections of the budget. Therefore, it is referred to the opinion of the Khalifah, and the Khalifah is the one to decide according to his opinion and Ijtihad. This is since the Messenger (pbuh) was the one who took the revenues from the administrators, and would take charge of how it was spent; some of the governors were given the permission to collect the revenues such as when Mu’adh b. Jabal was appointed governor over Yemen. After that, each of the righteously guided Khulafaa’ individually in their capacity as the Khalifah used to take the revenues and spend them according to their opinion and Ijtihad, and no one rebuked them over this. There was no one other than the Khalifah who would act independently with respect to collecting a single Dinar and no one would spend it unless he had permission from the Khalifah to do so, as what happened in Umar’s (ra) appointment of Mu’awiyah who was given a general governorship and so could collect and spend the revenues. All of this indicates that the sections of the budget of the State are drafted by the Khalifah alone, or by someone deputised by him.

These are the detailed evidences regarding the powers of the Khalifah. And all of them are collected together in what was reported by Al-Bukhari from ‘Abd Allah Bin Umar that he heard the Messenger (pbuh) say

 » الإِمَامُ رَاعٍ وَمَسْ ئُولٌ عَنْ رَعِيَّتِهِ ...«

“...The Imam (ruler) is a guardian and responsible (will be questioned) of his subjects”, and in the narration of Ahmad and Al-Bayhaqi and Abu Awanah from ‘Abd Allah Bin Umar

» الْإِمَامُ رَاعٍ وَهُوَ مَسْئُولٌ عَنْ رَعِيَّتِهِ «

“The Imam is a guardian and is responsible of his subjects”, in other words, everything that is connected to managing the affairs of the subjects from all issues is only for the Khalifah and restricted to him alone, and he can delegate whom he wants, to what he wants, as he wants, by proof that it is analogous to proxy.

The Ummah is the one who appoints the Khalifah. However, it does not possess the right to remove him once the pledge of allegiance has been concluded according to the Shari’ah method.

This article has two halves; the first that the Ummah is the one who holds the right to appoint the Khalifah; the second being that the Ummah does not possess the right to remove him.

As for the first half, the proof for it is the narrations regarding the pledge of allegiance, since no one possesses the right to undertake the position of the Khilafah except through the pledge, because the pledge is the method to appoint the Khalifah. This is established from the pledge of the Muslims to the Messenger (pbuh) and from the command of the Messenger (pbuh) for us regarding the pledge, and that the righteous Khulafaa’ only undertook the Khilafah through the pledge of allegiance.

With respect to the second half, its evidence is the order to obey the Khalifah even if he commits something reproachable, or is oppressive, as long as it is not a clear disbelief. It is narrated by Muslim from Ibn ‘Abbas that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said

مَنْ رَأَى مِنْ أَمِيرِهِ شَيْئًا يَكْرَهُهُ فَ لْيَصْبِرْ، فَإِنَّهُ مَنْ فَارَقَ الْجَمَاعَةَ شِبْ رًا فَمَاتَ « » فَمِيتَةٌ جَاهِلِيَّة

“One who found in his Amir something which he disliked should hold his patience, for one who separated from the main body of the Muslims even to the extent of a handspan and then he died would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya.”, and the word “his Amir” is general, and the Khalifah falls under it since he is the Amir of the believers. And in the narration of Yazid b. Salamah Al-Ju’fi in Tabarani in which he said: “O Prophet (phuh) of Allah, what do you think if we have rulers who rule over us and demand that we discharge our obligations towards them, but they (themselves) do not discharge their own responsibilities towards us? What do you order us to do? The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) avoided giving any answer. Salama asked him again. He (again) avoided giving any answer. Then he asked again-it was the second time or the third time-when Ash'ath b. Qais pulled him aside and said:

» اسْمَعُوا وَأَطِيعُوا فَإِ نَّمَا عَلَيْهِمْ مَا حُمِّلُوا وَعَلَيْكُمْ مَا حُمِّلْ تُمْ «

 Listen to them and obey them, for on them shall he their burden and on you shall be your burden”.

Al-Bukhari and Muslim reported (with the wording here from Muslim) through ‘Ubadah b. Samit who said:

فَ بَايَ عْنَاهُ فَكَانَ فِيمَا أَخَذَ عَلَيْ نَا أَنْ بَايَ عَنَا عَلَى السَّمْعِ  دَعَانَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ « وَالطَّاعَةِ فِي مَنْشَطِنَا وَمَكْرَهِنَا وَعُسْرِنَا وَيُسْرِنَا وَأَثَ رَةٍ عَلَيْ نَا وَأَنْ لاَ ن نَُازِعَ الأَمْرَ أَهْلَه قَالَ: » إِلاَّ أَنْ تَ رَوْا كُفْرًا بَ وَاحًا عِنْدَكُمْ مِنَ اللَّهِ فِيهِ ب رُْهَانٌ

“The Prophet (phuh) called us and we gave him the Pledge of allegiance for Islam, and among the conditions on which he took the Pledge from us, was that we were to listen and obey (the orders) both at the time when we were active and at the time when we were tired, and at our difficult time and at our ease and to be obedient to the ruler and give him his right even if he did not give us our right, and not to fight against him unless we noticed him having open Kufr (disbelief) for which we would have a proof with us from Allah” And it is narrated from Abu Dharr that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said,

 يَا أَبَا ذَرٍّ، كَيْفَ أَنْتَ عِنْدَ وُلاَةٍ يَسْتَأْثِرُونَ عَلَيْكَ بِهَذَا الْفَيْءِ ؟ قَالَ: وَالَّذِي « بَ عَثَكَ بِالْحَقِّ، أَضَعُ سَيْفِي عَلَى عَاتِقِي فَأَضْرِبُ بِهِ حَتَّى أَلْحَقَكَ، قَالَ: أَفَلاَ أَدُلُّكَ عَلَى » خَيْرٍ لَكَ مِنْ ذَلِكَ ؟ تَصْبِرُ حَتَّى تَ لْقَانِي

“O Abu Dharr, how would you act with those governors who would take sole possession of this booty?” He said “By the One who sent you with the Truth, I would place my sword over my shoulder and then fight until I meet with you (die)”. He said, “Should I not tell you what is better than that? Have patience until you meet me” (reported by Ahmed and authenticated by Al-Zain, and it is also reported by Abu Dawud).

In all of these narrations the Khalifah acted in a way that would mandate his removal and despite that the Messenger (pbuh) ordered obedience to him and to be patient over his oppression, which indicates that the Ummah does not have the right to remove the Khalifah.

Additionally, the Messenger (pbuh) refused to allow the Bedouin to cancel his pledge of allegiance. It is narrated by Jabir Bin ‘Abd Allah that a Bedouin gave the pledge of allegiance to the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) and then became ill and so said, “Cancel my pledge”, so he refused. Then he returned and said, “Cancel my pledge”, so he refused. So the man left. The Messenger (pbuh) said

» إِنَّمَا الْمَدِينَةُ كَالْكِيرِ تَ نْفِي خَبَثَ هَا وَيَ نْصَعُ طَيِّبُ هَا «

“Madina is like the blacksmith's furnace. It removes the impurities and purifies the good.” which indicates that if the pledge is given it is binding upon those who gave it and which means they do not have the right to remove the Khalifah since they do not have the right to cancel their pledge of allegiance to him. It cannot be argued that the Bedouin wanted to leave Islam and not just the obedience to the ruler through his cancellation of the pledge of allegiance. This cannot be justified since if he did that then his action would have been one of apostasy and the Messenger (pbuh) would have killed him, because the apostate is killed. Also, the pledge is not a pledge upon Islam but rather a pledge upon obedience. Accordingly he wanted to remove himself from the obedience and not from Islam. Consequently, it is not correct for the Muslims to turn away from their pledge and so they do not possess the right to remove the Khalifah.

However, the Shari’ah clarifies at what point the Khalifah removes oneself without a need to be removed, and when he deserves to be removed, and none of these mean that the Ummah has the right to remove him. Rather they account him with the powerful word of truth against oppression and fight against him if he announces clear disbelief. The power to remove him when he deserves it is held by the Madhalim court.

The method of appointing the Khalifah is the pledge of allegiance (Bay’a). The practical steps to appoint the Khalifah and his Bay’a are:

a. The Madhalim court announces the vacancy of the position of the Khilafah

b. The temporary leader takes control of his responsibility and announces the opening of the nomination procedure immediately

c. Applications of the candidates fulfilling the contracting conditions would be accepted, excluding the other applications, by the decision from the Madhalim court.

d. The candidates who have been accepted by the Madhalim court, are then short listed twice by the Muslim members of the Shura council: first; they select the six candidates who got the highest votes from them, and the second stage is to select the two candidates who got the highest votes

e. The names of the two are announced and the Muslims are requested to vote for one of them

f. The result of the elections is announced and the Muslims are informed of the one that got most of the votes.

g. The Muslims promptly set out to give the pledge to whoever got most of the votes, as the Khalifah of the Muslims upon the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of His Messenger .

h. Once the pledge has been completed, the Khalifah is announced to the public, until the news of his appointment has reached the whole Ummah, with mentioning of his name and that he fulfilled the characteristics that make him valid for contracting the Khilafah to him.

i. After completing the steps to appoint the new Khalifah the responsibility of the temporary leader ends.

When the Shari’ah obligated the appointment of a Khalifah upon the Ummah, it specified the method by which he would be appointed. This method has been defined by the Quran and Sunnah and the consensus of the companions. This method is the pledge of allegiance (Bay’a). The appointment of the Khalifah occurs through the taking of the Bay’a of the Muslims upon the action by the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of His Messenger. What is meant by “Muslims” is those Muslims who were under the responsibility of the last Khalifah if the Khilafah was established or the Muslims of the area which the Khilafah was being established within if it was not already established.

The fact that this method (Bay’a) is confirmed by the Muslims’ Bay’a to the Messenger (pbuh) , and from the order of the Messenger (pbuh) upon us to give the Bay’a to the Imam. As for the Bay’a of the Muslims to the Messenger (pbuh) , it was not a Bay’a on Prophethood but rather upon ruling, since it was a Bay’a upon action and not upon confimation (of the truth of his Prophethood. So he was given the Bay’a upon the basis that he was a ruler and not that he was a Prophet (phuh) or a Messenger, since the confirmation of belief in Prophethood and his message is Iman and not Bay’a. Therefore, all that remains is that the Bay’a must have been in respect of him being the head of the state. The Bay’a is mentioned in the Quran and the Sunnah. Allah (swt) says:

 

“O Prophet (phuh), when the believing women come to you pledging to you that they will not associate anything with Allah, nor will they steal, nor will they commit unlawful sexual intercourse, nor will they kill their children, nor will they bring forth a slander they have invented between their arms and legs, nor will they disobey you in what is right - then accept their pledge.” (TMQ 60:12), and Allah (swt) says

 

“Indeed, those who pledge allegiance to you, [O Muhammad] - they are actually pledging allegiance to Allah. The hand of Allah is over their hands.” (TMQ 48:10). Al- Bukhari reported: Isma‘il said that Malik said to me from Yahya b. Sa‘id who said: ‘Ubadah b. Al-Walid said his father said to him from ‘Ubadah b. Al-Samit:

 عَلَى السَّمْعِ وَالطَّاعَةِ، فِي الْمَنْشَطِ وَالْمَكْرَهِ، وَأَنْ لاَ  بَايَ عْنَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ « » ن نَُازِعَ الأَمْرَ أَهْلَهُ، وَأَنْ نَ قُومَ أَوْ نَ قُولَ بِالْحَقِّ حَيْثُمَا كُنَّا، لا نَخَافُ فِي اللَّهِ لَوْمَةَ لائِمٍ

“We gave the oath of allegiance to Allah's Prophet (phuh) that we would listen to and obey him both at the time when we were active and at the time when we were tired and that we would not fight against the ruler or disobey him, and would stand firm for the truth or say the truth wherever we might be, and in the Way of Allah we would not be afraid of the blame of the blamers. ”. And in Muslim from ‘Abd Allah b. Amr b. Al-‘As that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said:

وَمَنْ بَايَعَ إِمَامًا فَأَعْطَاهُ صَفْقَةَ يَدِهِ وَثَمَرَةَ قَ لْبِهِ، فَ لْيُطِعْهُ إِنِ اسْتَطَاعَ ، فَإِنْ ...« » جَاءَ آخَرُ ي نَُازِعُهُ فَاضْرِبُوا عُنُقَ الآخَرِ

“He who swears allegiance to an Imam, he should give him the pledge in ratification and the sincerity of his heart. He should obey him to the best of his capacity. If another man comes forward as a claimant (when one has already been installed), behead the second ”. And also in Muslim from Abu Sa‘id Al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said

 » إِذ ا بُويِعَ لِخَلِيفَتَ يْنِ فَاقْ تُ لُوا الآخَرَ مِنْ هُمَا «

“When oath of allegiance has been taken for two caliphs, kill the one for whom the oath was taken later”. Muslim also reported from Abu Hazem who said: I sat with Abu Huraira for five years, and I heard him say from the Prophet (phuh)

كَانَتْ بَ نُو إِسْرَائِيلَ تَسُوسُهُمْ الأَنْبِيَاءُ، كُلَّمَا هَلَكَ نَبِ ي خَلَفَهُ نَبِ ي، وَإِنَّهُ لا نَبِيَّ « بَ عْدِي، وَسَيَكُونُ خُلَفَاءُ فَ يَكْثُ رُونَ، قَالُوا: فَمَا تَأْمُرُنَا؟ قَالَ: فُوا بِبَ يْ عَةِ الأَوَّلِ فَالأَوَّلِ، » أَعْطُوهُمْ حَقَّهُمْ، فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ سَائِلُهُمْ عَمَّا اسْتَ رْعَاهُمْ

Banu Isra'il were ruled over by the Prophet (phuh)s. When one Prophet (phuh) died, another succeeded him; but after me there is no Prophet (phuh) and there will be caliphs and they will be quite large in number. His Companions said: What do you order us to do (in case we come to have more than one Caliph)? He said: The one to whom allegiance is sworn first has a supremacy over the others. Concede to them their due rights (i. e. obey them). Allah will question them about the subjects whom He had entrusted to them.”

The texts of the Quran and Sunnah are explicit that the method to appoint the Khalifah is the Bay’a. It could also be understood from the consensus of the companions, who acted upon this, and the Bay’a to the righteous Khulafaa’ are clear in this regard.

The practical steps which conclude with the action of the appointment of the Khalifah before the giving of the pledge to him are understood from what occurred with the righteous khulafaa’ who came straight after the death of the Messenger (pbuh) . They were Abu Bakr (ra), Umar (ra), ‘Uthman (ra) and ‘Ali (ra), may Allah be pleased with them. All of the companions were silent upon and consented to the steps taken, even though they were steps which would have been rejected if they contradicted the Shari‘a since they were connected to the most important issue upon which the Muslim entity rested and the continuity of the ruling by Islam.

Whoever followed what occurred in the appointment of those Khulafaa’, they would find that some of the Muslims discussed the issue in Saqifa Bani Sa‘idah and that the candidates were Sa’d (ra), Abu ‘Ubaida (ra), Umar (ra) and Abu Bakr (ra). However, both Umar (ra) and Abu ‘Ubaida (ra) did not wish to contest the issue against Abu Bakr (ra), and so the issue was really between Abu Bakr (ra) and Sa’d Bin ‘Ubada (ra) and no one else, with the result of the discussion being that the Bay’a was given to Abu Bakr (ra). Then on the second day the Muslims were called to the mosque to give him their Bay’a, and so the Bay’a in Al-Saqifa was one of contracting, and with it the person becomes the Khalifah of the Muslims, and the Bay’a in the mosque on the second day is the Bay’a of obedience.

When Abu Bakr (ra) felt that his illness was terminal and specifically that the Muslim armies were involved in battles with the major powers of the time, the Persians and the Romans, he called the Muslims in order to consult them upon who should be the Khalifah for them and spent three months doing this consultation. When he had completed it and knew the opinion of the majority of the Muslims, he commissioned them, or in modern terminology nominated, that Umar (ra) should be the Khalifah after him. This commissioning or nomination was not a contract for Umar (ra) to be the Khalifah after him, since after the death of Abu Bakr (ra) the Muslims attended the mosque to give their Bay’a to Umar (ra) and through that he became the Khalifah of the Muslims, and not through the consultations, or Abu Bakr’s (ra) commission, since if the nomination by Abu Bakr (ra) was a contract for the Khilafah then he would not have required the Bay’a of the Muslims. This is on top of the texts mentioned earlier which explicitly indicate that the only manner for a person to become the Khalifah is through the Bay’a given by the Muslims.

At the time that Umar (ra) was stabbed the Muslims requested that he appoint a successor which he refused to do. They pressed upon him and so he made, or nominated, six candidates for them, after which he appointed Suhayb to lead the people in prayer and to prevail upon those whom Umar (ra) had nominated until they decided upon a Khalifah from amongst themselves during the three days he had specified for them. He said to Suhayb

 فإن اجتمع خمسة، ورضوا رجلاً، وأبى واحد، فاشدخ رأسه أو اضرب ...« »... رأسه بالسيف

“if five of them agreed upon a man while one disagreed, then strike his head with a sword..” as has been reported by Al-Tabari in his Al-Ta’rikh, as well as Ibn Qutaybah who authored the book Al-Imama wa ’l-Siyasa which is commonly known by Al-Ta’rikh Al-Khulafaa’, and Ibn Sa’d in Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra. Then Umar (ra) appointed Abu Talha Al-Ansari along with fifty men to guard them, and charged Al-Miqdad Bin Al-Aswad with finding a place for them to meet. Then after the death of Umar (ra) and subsequent to the council settling upon the candidates, ‘Abd al Rahman Bin ‘Auf said: Which of you would remove yourselves (from consideration) and assume responsibility to select the best of you? To which all of them remained silent. Then ‘Abd al Rahman said I remove myself and then consulted each of them individually asking them who they considered the most worthy of the responsibility if they didn’t consider themselves, and he found that their answers were limited to two: ‘Ali (ra) and ‘Uthman (ra). After that ‘Abd al Rahman sought the opinions of the Muslims asking them which of the two they would prefer. He asked the men and women, surveying the opinion of the people, not just during the daytime but even during the night. Al-Bukhari narrated from Al-Miswar Bin Makhrama who said

طَرَقَنِي عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بَ عْدَ هَجْعٍ مِنْ اللَّيْلِ، فَضَرَبَ الْبَابَ حَتَّى اسْتَ يْ قَظْتُ، « » فَ قَالَ أَرَاكَ نَائِمًا، فَ وَاللَّهِ مَا اكْتَحَلْتُ هَذِهِ اللَّيْ ل ةَ بِكَبِيرِ نَ وْمٍ

“Abdur-Rahman called on me after a portion of the night had passed and knocked on my door till I got up, and he said to me, "I see you have been sleeping! By Allah, during the last three nights I have not slept enough”. After the people had offered morning prayer, Bay’a of ‘Uthman (ra) was completed. He became the Khalifah through the Bay’a of the Muslims, and not because Umar (ra) limited it to six. Then ‘Uthman (ra) was killed, and so the masses of the Muslims in Madinah and Kufa gave their Bay’a to ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (ra), and so he became the Khalifah through the Bay’a of the Muslims.

By close examination of the manner of their Bay’a, it becomes clear that the candidates for the Khilafah were announced to the people and that they all fulfilled the necessary conditions of contracting. After this the opinion of the influential people (Ahl Al hal Wal-‘Aqd) from the Muslims was taken, the representatives of the Ummah, and the representatives were well known in the era of the righteous Khulafaa’ since they were the companions, may Allah be pleased with them, or the people of Madinah. Whoever the companions, or the majority of them, wanted to become Khalifah was given the Bay’a of contracting, and thus became the Khalifah to whom obedience was obligatory, and so the Muslims would give them the Bay’a of obedience. In this manner the Khalifah is found and becomes the authorised representative of the Ummah in ruling and authority.

As for the issue of limiting the candidates, then by following the manner in which the righteous Khulafaa’ were appointed, it becomes clear that the candidacy was limited. In Saqifa Bani Sa’idah the candidates were Abu Bakr (ra), Umar (ra), Abu ‘Ubaida (ra) and Sa’d Bin ‘Ubada (ra) and that was all, though Umar (ra) and Abu ‘Ubaydah (ra) didn’t wish to compete against Abu Bakr (ra) and so in practical terms the candidates were Abu Bakr (ra) and Sa’d Bin ‘Ubada (ra). Then the Ahl Al Hal Wal-‘Aqd elected Abu Bakr (ra) the Khalifah in Al-Saqifa and gave him the Bay’a of contracting, and the next day the Muslims gave Abu Bakr (ra) the Bay’a of obedience in the mosque.

Abu Bakr (ra) nominated Umar (ra) as the Khalifah for the Muslims, without there being any other candidate, and then the Muslims gave him the Bay’a of contracting and then the Bay’a of obedience.

Umar (ra) nominated six candidates for the Muslims and told them to elect the Khalifah from amongst themselves, then ‘Abd Al-Rahman b. ‘Awf discussed with five of them and limited them to two: ‘Ali (ra) and ‘Uthman (ra), after the others had charged him to do. After that he surveyed the opinion of the people and that opinion settled upon ‘Uthman (ra) as the Khalifah.

As for ‘Ali (ra), there was no other candidate for the Khilafah and so the masses of the Muslims in Madinah and Kufa gave him the Bay’a and he became the fourth Khalifah.

And due to the Bay’a of ‘Uthman (ra) being settled within the maximum permitted time to elect the Khalifah – three days and nights – and also that the candidates were limited to six and then after that to two, we will mention how that occurred with the details in order to understand the issue we are discussing:

1. Umar (ra) died on Sunday morning in Muharram 24 A.H. from the effects of being stabbed by Abu Lu’lu’a, may Allah (swt) curse him, when Umar (ra) was standing in prayer in the pulpit of the mosque during the Wednesday morning prayer four days before the end of Dhul Hijja 23 A.H. Suhayb led the prayer for him in accordance with his will.

2. When they had completed the issue of Umar (ra), Al-Miqdad gathered the council of six which had been entrusted by Umar (ra) in one of the houses and Abu Talha took care of their needs. They sat therein and discussed and then appointed Abd Al-Rahman b. ‘Awf to select the Khalifah from amongst them with their consent.

3. ‘Abd Al-Rahman began to discuss with them and he asked each of them: If he was not to be the Khalifah then who did he think should be from amongst the others? Their answers were limited to ‘Ali (ra) and ‘Uthman (ra), and so Abd Al-Rahman limited the candidacy to two from the original six.

4. After that Abd Al-Rahman began to consult the people as is well known.

5. On Tuesday night - in other words, the night of the third day after the death of Umar (ra) on Sunday, Abd Al-Rahman went to the house of his nephew Al-Miswar Bin Makhramah. The following is taken directly from Al- Bidayah Wal-Nihayah of Ibn Kathir:

)فلما كانت الليلة التي يس ف ر صباحها عن اليوم الرابع من موت عمر، ج اء - أي عبد الرحمن بن ع وف - إلى منزل ابن أخته المس ور بن مخرمة فقال: أنائم يا مس ور؟ والله لَم أغتمض بكثير ن وم منذ ثلاث ...(

“When the night whose morning was the fourth day after the death of Umar, Abd Al-Rahman b. ‘Awf came to the house of his nephew Al-Miswar Bin Makhrama and said “You are sleeping O Miswar? By Allah, I did not get much sleep for the last three (nights)” in other words, the last three nights after the death of Umar (ra) which occurred on Sunday morning, which was Sunday, Monday and Tuesday night – until he said

 )إذهب فادع إليَّ علياً وعثمان ... ثم خرج بهما إلى المسجد ... ونودي في الناس عامة : الصلاة جامعة ...(

“Go and summon ‘Ali and ‘‘Uthman for me…then he went out with them to the mosque…the people were summoned: the prayer will be held in congregation”, which was the Wednesday morning prayer. Then he took Ali’s (ra) hand, may Allah (swt) be pleased with him and honour his face, and asked him regarding taking the Bay’a upon the Book of Allah (swt), the Sunnah of His Messenger and the actions of Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra). ‘Ali (ra) famously replied: upon the Book and the Sunnah – yes. As for the actions of Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra), he would make his own Ijtihad. Abdul Rahman removed his hand, took the hand of ‘Uthman (ra) and asked the same question. ‘Uthman (ra) replied: By Allah yes, and so the Bay’a was completed with ‘Uthman (ra).

Suhayb led the people in the morning and midday prayer that day, and then ‘Uthman (ra) led them in the afternoon prayer as the Khalifah of the Muslims. This means that despite the contracting Bay’a to ‘Uthman (ra) starting at the Morning Prayer, the leadership of Suhayb did not expire except after the Bay’a of the influential people in Madinah to ‘‘Uthman (ra). This was completed a little before the afternoon prayer, where the companions summoned each other to give Bay’a to ‘Uthman (ra) until after the middle of that day had passed and before the afternoon prayer. When the taking of the Bay’a was completed before the afternoon prayer, the leadership of Suhayb finished, and ‘Uthman (ra) led the people in the afternoon prayer as their Khalifah.

The author of Al-Bidayah Wal-Nihayah explains why Suhayb led the people in the afternoon prayer though ‘Uthman (ra) took the Bay’a at the morning prayer, saying: “The people gave him the Bay’a in the mosque, then he was taken to the house of Shura (i.e. the house where the people of consultation met), so the rest of the people gave him the Bay’a . It seems he did not finish taking the Bay’a until after the midday prayer. So, Suhayb prayed that prayer in the Prophet (phuh)’s mosque, thus the first prayer in which the Khalifah, leader of the believers ‘Uthman (ra) led the Muslims was the afternoon prayer”.

Consequently the following matters must be considered when making nominations for the post of Khilafah after it becomes vacant (through death or dismissal), which are:

1. The work regarding candidacy and appointment must be done day and night until the task is completed.

2. Nominees have to be short listed in terms of fulfilling the contractual conditions, a matter that is conducted by the Madhalim court.

3. Nominees are short listed twice: to six and then to two. The council of the Ummah conducts this short listing as representatives of the Ummah. This is because the Ummah delegated Umar (ra) to represent them, who nominated six people and the six nominees delegated a representative from amongst themselves, ‘Abd al Rahman, who short listed the nominees to two after discussion. Thus, the reference in all of this is the Ummah’s council; in other words, its representatives.

4. After the completion of the elections and the Bay’a, the Khalifah is announced to the public such that all of the Ummah are aware of it, and his name and characteristics that mean he fulfils the criteria for the contraction of the Khilafah are also mentioned.

5. The task of the temporary leader expires after the completion of the taking of the Bay’a by the Khalifah, rather than by the announcement of the results. The leadership of Suhayb did not finish by the election of ‘Uthman (ra), but rather by the completion of his Bay’a.

This is the case if there was a Khalifah and he passed away or was removed and a Khalifah needs to be appointed to replace him.

If there is no Khalifah at all, it becomes obligatory upon the Muslims to appoint a Khalifah, to implement the rules of the shari’a and to carry the Islamic call to the world, as is currently the case since the removal of the Islamic Khilafah in Istanbul, on 28th Rajab 1342 AH (3rd March 1924). In such a situation, every one of the Muslim countries in the Islamic world is suitable to appoint a Khalifah, and the Khilafah would be contracted to him. So, if one of the Muslim countries gave the Bay’a to a Khalifah, and the Khilafah was contracted to him, it becomes obligatory upon the Muslims in the other countries to give him the Bay’a of obedience or in other words, a Bay’a of submission to his authority. This is after the Khilafah has been concluded to him through the Bay’a of the people of his country. The following four conditions have to be fulfilled in that country:

1. The authority of the country must be in the hands of the Muslims and not in the hands of a non-Islamic country or under a non-Islamic influence.

2. The security of the Muslims in that country must be guaranteed by Islam; in other words, its protection at home and abroad should be in the name of Islam and by Islamic forces to the exclusion of all others.

3. The implementation of Islam should take place with immediate effect in a comprehensive and radical manner; the Khalifah must be involved in the conveying of the call to Islam.

4. The Khalifah must fulfil all the contractual conditions, although he might not fulfil the preferred conditions, since what matters are the conditions of the contract.

Should that country satisfy these four conditions then the Khilafah would be established by the Bay’a of that country alone, and the Khilafah would be concluded by it alone. The Khalifah to whom they gave the Bay’a would become the legitimate Khalifah and any Bay’a to other than him would be invalid.

Any country that might give the Bay’a to another Khalifah after that, then their Bay’a would be invalid, due to the saying of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh)

» إِذَا بُويِعَ لِخَلِيفَتَ يْنِ فَاقْ تُ لُوا الآخَرَ مِنْ هُمَا «

“When oath of allegiance has been taken for two caliphs, kill the one for whom the oath was taken later” and his saying

 » فُوا بِبَ يْ عَةِ الأَوَّلِ فَالأَوَّلِ ...«

“Fulfil the Bay’a (oath of allegiance) of the first, then the first” and his saying

 وَمَنْ بَايَعَ إِمَامًا فَأَعْطَاهُ صَ فْ قَ ةَ يَدِهِ وَثَمَرَةَ قَ لْبِهِ، فَ لْ يُطِ عْ هُ إِنِ اسْ تَطَاعَ ، فَإِنْ « » جَاءَ آخَرُ ي نَُازِعُهُ فَاضْرِبُوا عُنُقَ الآخَرِ

“He who swears allegiance to an Imam, he should give him the pledge in ratification and the sincerity of his heart. He should obey him to the best of his capacity. If another man comes forward as a claimant (when one has already been installed), behead the second”

The method of the Bay’a: In the aforementioned we have explained the evidences for the Bay’a as the prescribed method of appointing a Khalifah in Islam. Regarding its practical implementation, it is through shaking the hand as well as by writing. It has been narrated by ‘Abd Allah b. Dinar who said: “I witnessed Ibn Umar when people agreed on Abd Al-Malik b. Marwan saying:

 كتب أني أقر بالسمع والطاعة لعبد الله عبد الملك أمير المؤمنين على كتاب الله « » وسنة رسوله ما استطعت

 "I write herewith that I swear allegiance to listen to and obey ‘Abd Allah Abd Al-Malik, the leader of the believers, in accordance with the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, to the best of my ability”. The Bay’a can also be given by any other means.

The Bay’a should only be given by an adult as the Bay’a of the minor is not valid. Abu Aqeel Zahrah b. Ma‘bad reported on the authority of his grand-father ‘Abd Allah b. Hisham who lived during the time of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) , that his mother Zaynab bint Hamid took him to the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) and said “O Messenger of Allah, take Bay’a from him” upon this the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said

» هُوَ صَغِيرٌ، فَمَسَحَ رَأْسَهُ وَدَعَا لَه «

“He is young” and he wiped over his head and prayed for him, as narrated by Al-Bukhari.

As for the wording of the Bay’a, it is not restricted to any specific wording, but it should include the commitment that the Khalifah acts according to the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of His Messenger and that the person who gives the Bay’a should pledge to obey in that which they liked and disliked and in ease and hardship. A law will be published that will determine this wording in accordance with the previous points.

Once the Bay’a is given to the Khalifah, then the Bay’a becomes a trust on the neck of the one who gave the Bay’a, where he is not allowed to withdraw it. For it is his right in terms of appointing the Khalifah until he gives it. But once he gave it, he is not allowed to withdraw it. Even if he wanted to do so, he is not permitted to withdraw his Bay’a. Al-Bukhari narrated from Jabir Ibn ‘Abd Allah that a Bedouin gave the Bay’a to the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) on Islam, but he became unwell, so he said:

 » أَقِلْنِي بَ يْ عَتِي «

“Relieve me of my Bay’a (cancel my pledge) ”, which the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) refused. Then he came and said the same, but the Messenger (pbuh) rejected. So he left the town. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said

» إِنَّمَا الْمَدِينَةُ كَالْكِيرِ ت نْفِي خَبَثَ هَا وَيَ نْصَعُ طَيِّبُ هَا «

“Madina is like the blacksmith's furnace. It removes the impurities and purifies the good.”

Muslim also narrated from Nafi’ on the authority of ‘Abd Allah b. Umar that he heard the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) say

 » مَنْ خَل عَ يَدًا مِنْ طَاعَةٍ، لَقِيَ اللَّهَ يَ وْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ لا حُجَّةَ لَه «

“One who withdraws his hand from obedience (to the Amir) will find no argument (in his defense) when he stands before Allah on the Day of Resurrection ”.

Breaking the Bay’a to the Khalifah is a withdrawal of the hand from the obedience to Allah (swt). However, this is the case if his Bay’a to the Khalifah was a Bay’a of contracting, or a Bay’a of obedience to a Khalifah was accepted and pledged by the Muslims. But if he pledged himself to a Khalifah initially, and the Bay’a was not completed, then he has the right to relieve himself from that Bay’a, in view of the fact that the contracting Bay’a has not been concluded to him from the Muslims. So the prohibition in the hadith is focused on withdrawing a Bay’a to a Khalifah, not to a man for whom the Khilafah contract was not completed.

A temporary leader is appointed to take charge of the affairs of the Muslims, and to prepare for the election of the new Khalifah after the vacation of the position of the Khilafah according to the following process:

a. When the previous Khalifah feels that his life is coming to an end, or is committed to resigning, he has the right to appoint the temporary leader.

b. If the Khalifah dies or resigns before appointing the temporary leader, or the position of the Khilafah becomes vacant due to another reason, then the eldest of the assistants becomes the temporary leader unless he intended to be a candidate for the Khilafah in which case the next senior assistant is to be given the position and so on.

c. If all of the assistants intend to be candidates, then the eldest of the executive ministers will become the temporary leader or the one after him in seniority if he intends to be a candidate, and so on.

d. If all of the executive ministers intend to be candidates for the Khilafah, then the position of the temporary leader is given to the youngest executive minister.

e. The temporary leader does not have the right to adopt rules.

 f. The temporary leader makes all effort to complete the appointment of a new Khalifah within three days, and it is not permitted for this to be extended except due to overwhelming circumstances approved by the Madhalim court.

When the Khalifah feels that his death is close, close to the time that the Khilafah would become vacant, he may appoint a temporary leader to be responsible for the Muslims’ affairs during the period of steps being taken to appoint the new Khalifah. He would undertake his work after the death of the Khalifah and his main work would be to complete the appointment of the new Khalifah within three days.

It is not permitted for the temporary leader to adopt rules, since this is the right of the Khalifah who has been given a pledge by the Ummah. In the same manner, it is not permitted for him to be nominated for the Khilafah or to support the nominees, since Umar (ra) appointed someone other than those who were nominated for the Khilafah.

The responsibility of this leader ends with the appointment of the new Khalifah since his task was time-constrained to this goal.

The evidence for this is what Umar (ra) did when he was stabbed and this was done without any opposition from the companions and so is considered to be an Ijma’. Umar (ra) said to the six candidates

 » وليصلِّ بكم صهيب هذه الأيام الثلاثة التي تتشاورون فيها «

“Let Suhayb lead you in prayers during the three days of your consultation” and then he said to Suhaib, as mentioned in Tarikh Al-Tabari,

 صل بالناس ثلاثة أيام، إلى أن قال: فإن اجتمع خمسة، ورضوا رجلاً، وأبى « »... واحد، فاشدخ رأسه بالسيف

“lead the people in prayer for three days ..until he said: if five of them agree upon a man while one disagreed, then strike his head with a sword..”. This means that Suhaib was appointed as a leader over them – he was appointed as a leader for the prayer and leadership of the prayer meant leadership over the people. Also, he was given the right to apply the punishment (strike his head) and the only one who can establish punishment by death is the leader.

This issue took place in front of the companions without any dissenters and so it is an Ijma’ that the Khalifah can appoint a temporary leader who undertakes the steps to appoint the new Khalifah. In the same manner based upon this it is permitted for the Khalifah during his lifetime to adopt an article which would state that if he died without appointing a temporary leader to oversee the appointment of a new Khalifah, someone is to be the temporary leader.

Based upon this, it is adopted that if the Khalifah did not appoint a temporary leader during his terminal illness, then the temporary leader would be the eldest of his assistants as long as they are not a candidate, in which case it would be the next senior in age from his assistants, and so on, and then the executive ministers in the same manner.

This is applied in the event of the removal of the Khalifah, so the temporary leader would be the eldest assistant as long as he is not a candidate, and if he is a candidate then the next one in seniority and so on until all the assistants are considered, in which case it would then fall to the eldest executive minister and so on. If all of them want to be candidates then the youngest of the executive ministers is compelled to become the temporary leader.

This leader is different from the one the Khalifah appoints in his place when he goes out for Jihad or a journey, as the Prophet (phuh) used to do when he went out for Jihad or the final Hajj, or similar. In this situation the one who is delegated in his stead has the powers that the Khalifah defines for him to take care of the affairs necessitated by the delegation.

If the position of the Khilafah becomes vacant due to the death of its leader, his resignation or his removal, it is obligatory to appoint a Khalifah within three days from the date that the position of the Khilafah became vacant.

Appointing the Khalifah becomes obligatory from the moment that the previous Khalifah dies or is removed. However, it is permitted for the appointment to occur within three days with their nights as long as it is due to working to achieve it. If it takes longer than three nights and the Khalifah has still not been appointed, then the issue is considered – if the Muslims are working to establish it but are unable to achieve that during the three night time limit due to overwhelming circumstances that they are unable to overcome, then the sin is lifted from them since they are busy working to establish the obligation and are compelled to delay its establishment due to whatever forced them. It is reported from Ibn Hibban and Ibn Maja from Ibn Abbas: the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said:

» إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَضَعَ عَنْ أُمَّتِي الْخَطَأَ وَالنِّسْيَانَ وَمَا اسْ تُكْرِهُوا عَلَيْهِ «

“Verily Allah has pardoned for my Ummah: their mistakes, their forgetfulness, and that which they have been forced to do”. If they were not made busy with such overwhelming issues, then the most time allowed for the appointment is three days with their nights.

The evidence for the obligation of immediately working to establish the pledge of allegiance (Bay’a) to the Khalifah due only to the vacation of the position of the Khilafah is the Ijma’ of the companions. They immediately hurried to gather at Saqifa Bani Sa‘idah after the death of the Messenger (pbuh) on the same day and before his burial, and the pledge of contracting (Bay'at Al- In‘iqad) was completed on the same day with Abu Bakr (ra), and the next day the people gathered in the mosque to give the pledge of obedience (Bay'at Al-ta‘ah).

Limiting the time to establish the appointment of the Khalifah to three days is due to that when it became apparent that Umar (ra) was going to die from his stab wound, he delegated the issue of appointment of his successor to the people of Shura, and limited them to three days, and then commissioned that if the Khalifah was not agreed upon within the three days, those who differed after the three days should be killed. He appointed fifty men from the Muslims in order to execute this - in other words, to kill the dissenter, even though they were from the senior companions, and all of this was seen and heard by the companions and none of them rebuked it even though normally anything similar to it would have been reproachable, so it is considered an Ijma’ of the companions that it is not permitted for the position of Khalifah to be left vacant for more than three days, and the Ijma’ of the companions is an Islamic evidence in the same manner as the Quran and the Sunnah.

Al-Bukhari reported through Al-Miswar Bin Makhramah who said:

 طَرَقَنِي عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بَ عْدَ هَجْعٍ مِنْ اللَّيْلِ، فَضَرَبَ الْبَابَ حَتَّى اسْ تَ يْ قَظْتُ، « » فَ قَالَ أَرَاكَ نَائِمًا، فَ وَاللَّهِ مَا اكْتَحَلْتُ هَذِهِ اللَّيْ لَةَ بِكَبِيرِ نَ وْمٍ

“Abdur-Rahman called on me after a portion of the night had passed and knocked on my door till I got up, and he said to me, "I see you have been sleeping! By Allah, during the last three nights I have not slept enough”. And Ibn Kathir mentioned in the book Al-Bidayah wa ’l-Nihayah

 )فلما كانت الليلة التي يسفر صباحها عن اليوم الرابع من موت عمر، جاء عبد الرحمن بن عوف إلى منزل ابن أخته المسور بن مخرمة فقال: أنائم يا مسور؟ - - والله لَم أغتمض بكثير نوم منذ ثلاث ...(

“When the night whose morning would have been the fourth day after the death of Umar, ‘Abd Al-Rahman Bin ‘Auf came to the house of his nephew Al-Miswar Bin Makhramah and said “You are sleeping O Miswar? By Allah I did not get much sleep for the last three” - in other words, the last three nights and when the people prayed the Morning Prayer the pledge with ‘Uthman (ra) was completed.

There are seven conditions for the Khalifah to be contracted, which are: to be male, Muslim, free, adult, sane, just, and from the people who have the capability.

Since the Khilafah is a part of the ruling (guardianship), or rather it is the greatest guardianship, for that reason the text of the 19th article is mentioned here, in other words, the obligation for the seven mentioned conditions to be fulfilled:

The evidence that the Khalifah should be male is what has been narrated from the Messenger (pbuh) that when he heard that the Persians had given the rule to the daughter of Kisra, he said

 » لَنْ ي فُْلِحَ قَ وْمٌ وَلَّوْا أَمْرَهُمُ امْرَأَة «

“Never will succeed such a nation that makes a woman their leader.” (narrated by Al-Bukhari from Abu Bakrah); this narration contains a decisive prohibition regarding a woman being appointed the leader of a State, since the expression “never” indicates permanency, which is an exaggeration in negating the success, so it is a blame, which means that the request to leave the Khalifah from being a woman is a decisive request, and for this reason it was made a condition that he should be male.

As for the condition that he should be Muslim, this is due to His (swt) words

 

“And never will Allah give the disbelievers over the believers a way [to overcome them].” (TMQ 4:141), which is also a decisive prohibition since the expression “never” indicates permanency, and is information with the meaning of a request. As long as Allah (swt) prohibited the disbelievers having a way over the believers, then He (swt) prohibited for them to be made rulers over them, since the rule is the greatest way over the Muslims. Additionally, the Khalifah is the person of authority, and Allah (swt) made it a condition that the person of authority should be a Muslim. Allah (swt) said

 

“O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger (pbuh) and those in authority among you.” (TMQ 4:59) and He (swt) said

 

“And when there comes to them information about [public] security or fear, they spread it around. But if they had referred it back to the Messenger (pbuh) or to those of authority among them.” (TMQ 4:83). The words “people of authority” are not mentioned in the Quran unless it is also mentioned that they are from the Muslims, which indicates that the person of authority must be a Muslim. And since the Khalifah is the person of authority, and he is the one who appoints the people of authority, then it is a condition that he must be a Muslim.

With respect to the condition that he should be free, this is since the slave is owned by his master and so does not control the independence of conduct for himself, and by greater reasoning he does not control the conduct of others, and ,therefore, he cannot control the guardianship over the people.

As for the condition that he should be an adult, this is due to what was narrated by ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (ra) that the Messenger (pbuh) said

 أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ رُفِعَ الْقَلَمُ عَنْ ثَلَاثَةٍ عَنْ النَّائِمِ « » حَتَّى يَسْتَ يْقِظَ وَعَنْ الصَّغِيرِ حَتَّى يَكْبَ رَ وَعَنْ الْمَجْنُونِ حَتَّى يَ عْقِلَ أَوْ يُفِيقَ

“The Pen has been lifted from three (their actions are not recorded): from the sleeping person until he awakens, from the minor until he grows up, and from the insane person until he comes to his senses” and in a narration

 » وَعَنْ الْمُبْتَ لَى حَتَّى يَ بْ رَ أَ «

“and from the afflicted person, until he recovers ”, reported by Ibn Maja and Al-Hakim from ‘A’ishah, and the wording is from Ibn Maja. Al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Khuzaymah also reported a similar narration through ‘Ali (ra).

What is understood from lifting the pen is that it is not correct for him to act independently in his own affairs, so it would not be correct for him to be the Khalifah. Also, it is narrated from Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger (pbuh) said

 » تَ عَوَّذُوا بِاللَّهِ مِنْ رَأْسِ السَّبْعِينَ وَإِمَارَةِ الصِّبْ يَانِ «

“Seek refuge to Allah from the head of the seventy and the power of children” reported by Ahmad from Abu Hurayrah, which includes proof that it is not correct for a child to be the Khalifah. There is another narration from Abu ‘Aqil Zahrah Bin Ma‘bad, on the authority of his grandfather ‘Abd Allah Bin Hisham who lived at the time of the Prophet (phuh) , and his mother Zaynab bint Hamid took him to the Messenger (pbuh) and said

 يَا رَسُولَ اللَّ ه، بَايهعْه ،

“O Messenger of Allah, take the pledge from him”, and so the Messenger (pbuh) said

» هُوَ صَغِيرٌ، فَمَسَحَ رَأْسَهُ وَدَعَا لَه «

“He is young”, and touched his head and prayed for him, as reported by Al-Bukhari. Since the child is not permitted to give the pledge, then by greater reasoning he is not permitted to be given the pledge either.

As for the condition of being sane, the narration which was just mentioned

»... رفع القلم عن ثلاثة «

“the pen has been lifted from three …” to

» والمبتلى حتى يبرأ «

“the afflicted person until he recovers” and in another narration

 » والمجنون حتى يفيق «

“the insane until he comes to his senses”, and from the understanding of raising of the pen is that it is not correct for him to act independently in his own affairs, so it would not be correct for him to be the Khalifah and act upon the affairs of other people.

With respect to the condition of being just, this is because Allah (swt) made it a condition for the witness to be just; He (swt) says

 

“And bring to witness two just men from among you.” (TMQ 65:2), and so the one who is more significant than the witness, and that is the Khalifah, must by greater reasoning also be just. That is because if the just characteristic has been made a condition for the witness then for it to be a condition for the Khalifah is of a higher priority.

As for the condition that he is a capable person from amongst those who are able to fulfil the responsibility, this is necessitated by the pledge of allegiance, since the one who is not capable would be incapable of running the affairs of the people by the Quran and the Sunnah for those who gave him the pledge upon them.

The evidence for that includes:

1. Muslim narrated from Abu Dharr

 قُ لْتُ: يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، أَلا تَسْتَ عْمِلُنِي، قَالَ: فَضَرَبَ بِيَدِهِ عَلَى مَنْكِبِي ثُمَّ « قَالَ: يَا أَبَا ذَرٍّ، إِنَّكَ ضَ عِ يفٌ وَإِن هََّا أَمَانَةُ، وَإِن هََّا يَ وْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ خِزْيٌ وَنَدَامَةٌ إِلاَّ مَنْ أَخَذَهَا » بِحَقِّهَا وَأَدَّى ا لَّذِي عَلَيْهِ فِيهَا

“I said: O Messenger of Allah, Why don’t you appoint me (to an official position)? He patted me on the shoulder with his hand and said, “O Abu Dharr, you are a weak man and it is a trust and it will be a cause of disgrace and remorse on the Day of Resurrectin except for one who takes it up with a full sense of responsibility and fulfils what is entrusted to him (discharges its obligations efficiently.)”

This explains that giving the order its due right and performance is only done by those who are capable of it, and the indication that engenders decisiveness is what the Messenger (pbuh) said about whoever takes it and is not capable of it

»... وَإِن هََّا ي وَْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ خِزْيٌ وَنَدَامَةٌ إِلاَّ مَنْ أَخَذَهَا «

“and on the day of Judgement it will be a disgrace and a regret except for he who takes it”.

2. Al-Bukhari reported from Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said,

 إِذَا ضُ يِّ عَتِ الأَمَانَةُ فَانْ تَظِرِ السَّاعَةَ، قَالَ: كَيْفَ إِضَاعَتُ هَا يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ؟ « » قَالَ: إِذَا أُسْنِدَ الأَمْرُ إِلَى غَيْرِ أَهْلِهِ فَانْ تَظِرِ السَّاعَة

"When trust (honesty) is lost, then wait for the Hour. It was asked, “How will trust (honesty) be lost, O, Allah’s Propher?” He said, “When authority is given to those who not deserve it, then wait for the Hour.”

The narration indicates a decisive prohibition for the guardianship to be placed with one who is not suitable for it. And the decisive indication is that such an act would mean the abandonment of the trust, which is from the signs of the Hour, which is an indication of the enormity of the prohibition of it being undertaken by those not suitable for it.

As for how capability should be defined, this requires establishing the reality since it might be connected to bodily or mental illness, etc. and ,therefore, its definition is left for the Madhalim court, which will confirm that the conditions of contracting have been met in the candidates for the Khilafah.

The only conditions for the one who is given the pledge to be the leader of the State is that he fulfils the contracting conditions of the contract, even if he does not fulfil the preference conditions, since what matters are the contracting conditions of the contract.

The proof for this is the evidences that were narrated regarding the characteristics of the Khalifah. In some oft the narrations regarding his characteristics the request is nondecisive, such as his words

» إِنَّ هَذَا الأَمْرَ فِي قُ رَيْشٍ «

“The authority of ruling (Al-amr) is in Quraysh” (reported by Al-Bukhari from Mu’awiyah). This narration is informative, and it is in the informative form, and though it conveys the meaning of a request, it is not considered decisive as long as it is not accompanied by an indication that confirms its decisiveness, and there is no such indication from an authentic narration. As for what is transmitted in the narration,

» لا ي عَُادِيهِمْ أَحَدٌ إِلاَّ كَبَّهُ اللَّهُ عَلَى وَجْهِهِ مَا أَقَامُوا الدِّينَ «

“Whoever bears hostility to them, Allah will destroy him as long as they abide by the laws of religion” – this is to do with showing enmity to them and not as a confirmation for his words » إن هذا الأمر في قريش « “The authority of ruling (Al-Amr) is in the Quraysh”. This is apart from the fact that the word “Quraysh” is a noun and not an adjective, and is called a Laqab (title) in Usul Al-Fiqh, and the understanding (Mafhum) of the noun, or Laqab is not acted upon since the noun or Laqab does not have a Mafhum. For that reason the text about the Quraysh does not mean that other than they cannot be appointed.

Based upon this, this narration indicates a preferred condition and not a condition of contracting due to the absence of an indication that would make the request decisive; rather there is an indication that makes it non-decisive. When the Messenger (pbuh) offered himself to the tribe of ‘Amir Bin Sa’asa’a who asked

 » إِنَّ الأَمْرَ للَّهِ يَضَعُهُ حَيْثُ يَشَاء « : قال » أَيَكُونُ لَنَا الأَمْرُ يمنْ ب عَْ ي دكَ «

“Will the matter (authority of ruling) remain with us after you”, to which he said “The matter (authority of ruling) is in the Hand of Allah; He gives it to whoever He wills”, narrated by Ibn Ishaq from Al-Zuhri, then this indicates that the request was non-decisive since the reply of the Messenger (pbuh) indicates the permission for the order to be with them after him , and permitted to be with other than them, which indicates that the condition of being from Quraysh is a condition of preference.

As for the conditions of contracting, they are those that are related with a decisive request such that their absence leads to an absence of contracting (as is understood from the definition of what is a condition). In other words, the result of its absence would mean the invalidity of the Khilafah for him if he was not from Quraysh. The reply of the Messenger (pbuh) to the tribe of ‘Amir takes the request away from being decisive, as opposed to what has been narrated in the texts for the conditions of contracting. For example, the condition of maturity comes from the fact that the Messenger (pbuh) refused to take the pledge of allegiance from a child – when he refused to take allegiance from ‘Abd Allah b. Hisham – and the reason was due to his young age. Therefore, it is evidence that it is a condition for the Khalifah to be adult, since if the pledge is not correct from the child then by greater reasoning it would not be correct for the child to be the Khalifah.

Whatever characteristic has been mentioned by a decisive request is considered a condition for the contracting of the Khilafah with him, and anything else is not made a condition for contracting even if there is a text which mentions it as long as the request was non-decisive.

It is stipulated that the authority of the region or the country that gives the Khalifah a contracting pledge is autonomous dependent upon the Muslims alone, and not upon any disbelieving state; besides the security of the Muslims in that country, both internally and externally, is by the security of Islam not the security of the disbelief. With respect to the pledge of obedience taken from other countries, there are not such conditions.

The evidence is the forbiddance of the disbelievers having authority over the Muslims, in accordance with the His (swt) words

“And never will Allah give the disbelievers over the believers a way [to overcome them].” (TMQ 4:141), so if the authority of the disbelievers over the Muslims is present in any part of the Islamic lands, then that land would not be suitable to establish the Khalifah, since the establishment of a Khalifah is simply the establishment of an authority. Since that land does not possess the authority it ,therefore, cannot give it. Also its authority is an authority of disbelief, and the Khalifah is not established with the authority of disbelief.

This is from the angle of the authority; as for the issue of security, its evidence is the evidence for Dar Al-Islam and Dar Al-Kufr, since the establishment of the Khalifah would make the abode into an abode of Islam, and it is not possible for an abode to be an abode of Islam simply by establishing the rule of Islam but rather it is imperative that its security is by the security of Islam and not that of disbelief, since the conditions for the abode to be considered an abode of Islam are: firstly, to be ruled by Islam and secondly, for its security to be the security of Islam and not the security of disbelief.

No one can be Khalifa unless the Muslims appoint him, and no one possesses the mandatory powers of the leadership of the State unless the contract with him has been concluded according tothe Shari’ah, like any contract in Islam.

The evidence is that the Khilafah is a contract upon satisfaction and consent, since its reality as a contract means it is not contracted except through two contracting parties, and, therefore, no one is the Khalifah unless he was appointed to it by those whose agreement completes the conclusion of the contract according to the Shari’ah. So if someone appoints himself Khalifah without the pledge from those whom the Khilafah is contracted through, then he would not be a Khalifah until his pledge occurs with choice and consent from those whom the conclusion of the contract takes place. So the fact that the Khilafah is a contract necessitates the presence of two contracting parties, with each of them having the necessary Shari’ah qualifications to be entrusted with the contract and conclude it.

If a conqueror came about and took the ruling by force he does not become a Khalifah by that, even if he announces himself as Khalifah of the Muslims, since the Khilafah was not contracted to him by the Muslims. If he took the pledge of allegiance from the people by force and compulsion, he does not become the Khalifah even if he was given the pledge, since the pledge given through compulsion and force is not considered, and so the Khilafah cannot be contracted by it. This is because a contract of choice and consent cannot be completed through compulsion and force, and so it is not contracted except through a pledge given with satisfaction and consent. However, if this conqueror managed to convince the people that it was in the benefit of the Muslims to give him the pledge, and that the implementation of the Shari’ah would be complete through giving the pledge to him – and so the people became convinced and satisfied with that and gave him the pledge of allegiance on that basis with their own choice, then he would become the Khalifah from the moment that he was given that pledge by the people freely even though he took the authority through force and power. Therefore, the condition is the contracting of the pledge, and this is only reached through consent and choice, irrespective of whether the one who reached it was the ruler and leader, or wasn’t.

Page 12 of 14

Superior Economic Model : Islamic System