The Khilafah State is a Human State and not a Theological State The Islamic State is the Khilafah, for the one who holds its post would possess all the mandatory powers of ruling, authority and legislation without any exception. It is the supreme leadership over all the Muslims worldwide so as to implement the rules of the Islamic Shar’a using the concepts that Islam has brought and the rules which it has legislated; and to convey the Islamic Message to the world. The Message is conveyed by introducing Islam to people and calling on them to embrace it and perform Jihad in the way of Allah. Khilafah is also known as Imama or Imaratul-Mu’mineen (leadership of the believers). It is a temporal post and not a post relating to the Hereafter. The Khilafah exists to implement Islam on people and to spread it to mankind. It is different to the Prophethood, for the Prophethood and the Messengership are posts whereby a Prophet or a Messenger receives the Shar’a from Allah (swt), through revelation, to convey it to people regardless of its implementation. Allah (swt) says:
“The Messenger’s duty is only to preach the clear Message.” [TMQ An-Nur: 54]
He (swt) also says: “Your duty is to convey the Message.” [TMQ Al-Imran: 20]
Allah (swt) says:
“The Messenger’s duty is only to proclaim the Message.” [TMQ Al-Ma’idah: 99]
This is therefore, different from the Khilafah, which is the implementation of the Shar’a of Allah (swt) on mankind. It is not conditional for a Prophet or a Messenger to implement on the people what was revealed to Him from Allah (swt) in order to become a Messenger. Rather, it is conditional for Him to receive Shar’a from Allah (swt) and to be ordered to proclaim it can be seen, therefore, that the posts of Prophethood and Divine Messengership are different from the post of Khilafah, because Prophethood is theological, which Allah (swt) gives to whoever He wishes. The Khilafah on the other hand, is a human post whereby the Muslims give their Bay’ah to whoever they wish and appoint over them as Khaleefah whomever they like from among the Muslims. Our Messenger Muhammad (pbuh), was a ruler who implemented the Shari’ah which he had received from Allah. So he (pbuh) held the Prophethood and the Messengership and at the same time also assumed the post of presiding over the Muslims in establishing the rules of Islam. Allah (swt) thus, commanded Him to rule as well as to convey the Message. He ordered him:
“And judge between them by that which Allah has revealed.” [TMQ Al-Ma’idah: 49]
He (swt) also says:
“We have sent down to you the Book in truth so that you judge between people by that which Allah has shown you.” [TMQ An-Nisa: 105]
Allah (swt) also says:
“O Messenger! Proclaim the (Message) which has been sent to you from your Lord.” [TMQ Al-Ma’idah: 67]
“This Qur’an has been revealed to me by inspiration so that I may warn you and all whom it reaches.” [TMQ Al-An’am: 19]
“O you wrapped up. Arise and deliver warning.” [TMQ Al-Muddassir: 1-2]
However, when he (pbuh) conveyed the Message by words, such as proclaiming the saying of Allah (swt): “And Allah has made trading lawful and has forbidden usury.” [TMQ Al- Baqarah: 275]
He might proclaim it through his actions, like the treaty of Hudaybiyah, where he did so without hesitation. He (pbuh) would decisively order his followers to execute those orders without consulting anyone. He (pbuh) would even reject an opinion outright if anyone suggested it to him, if it was contrary to the revelation. If he (pbuh) were asked about a rule that had not yet been revealed to him, he would remain silent until such a rule was revealed. However, when he (pbuh) undertook the actions, he (pbuh) would consult the people; and when he judged between the people he did not confirm that what he decreed was according to the fact of the matter. He, rather said that he judged in accordance with what he heard of evidences.When the Surah of Bara’ah was revealed, he (pbuh) ordered ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib to catch up with Abu Bakr in order to call on the people and to proclaim the Surah to them during the Hajj season. So ‘Ali (rta) recited the Surah to them on ‘Arafat and went about them until he had proclaimed it. When the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) signed the treaty of Hudaybiyah, he rejected all the opinions of the Sahabah and forced his own opinion upon them because it was revelation from Allah (swt).When Jabir asked Him what to do with his wealth, he (pbuh) did not answer Him until the rule was revealed. Bukhari narrates a Hadith on the authority of Mohammed ibn al-Munkadir who said:
“I heard Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah say: ‘I had fallen ill so the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) came walking to visit me with Abu Bakr. He got there while I was unconscious. So he performed Wudhu then poured that water over me so I regained conscience, then I said, O Messenger of Allah (pbuh), what should I do with my wealth? How shall I act with regard to my wealth? He did not answer me until the verse of al-Meerath (inheritance) was revealed.’” This was with regard to the task of Prophethood, Messengership and the conveying (Tableegh) of the Message to the people. As for executing the task of government and ruling, the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) followed a different course. At the battle of Uhud the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) gathered the Muslims inside the Masjid and consulted them about whether to fight inside al-Madinah or outside it. The majority opted to fight outside while he (pbuh) preferred to fight inside Madinah, however, he (pbuh) chose to go along with the majority and to fight outside al-Madinah. Furthermore, when he (pbuh) judged between people he warned them that he might have judged in their favour at the expense of others. Al-Bukhari reports on the authority of Umm Salama that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) overheard a dispute outside his doorstep, so he came out to the disputing parties and said:
“I am only human and sometimes disputing parties come to me, some of you may be more eloquent than others, so I believe Him and I judge in his favour. Whoever I judged in his favour at the expense of another Muslim’s right it would be for Him like a piece from the Hell-fire, it is up to Him to take it or leave it.” Ahmad narrated from Anas that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said:
“...I verily would wish to meet Allah Azza wa Jall without anyone claiming from me for an act of injustice I had committed against Him be it blood or money.”
This clearly indicates that he held two posts: Prophethood, together with Messengership and the leadership over all the Muslims in the world in order to establish the Shari’ah of Allah which He (swt) revealed to Him (pbuh). He (pbuh) performed each task in accordance with that which the task itself required, acting differently in each role. He (pbuh) took the Bay’ah to rule upon the Muslims in ruling. He took it from men and women but not from children who had not yet reached puberty. This only confirms that it was a Bay’ah over ruling and not over Prophethood. We therefore find that Allah (swt) has never rebuked Him (pbuh) concerning the conveyance of the Message and the execution of its tasks. Instead He (pbuh) asked Him not to be disheartened by the lack of response from the people during the conveyance of the Message. Allah (swt) says:
“Let not your soul be vested in regret for them.” [TMQ Fatir: 8]
He (swt) also says: “
Nor grieve over them and distress not yourself because of their plots.” [TMQ An- Nahl: 127]
He (swt) also says:
“Your duty is but to convey the Message.” [TMQ Ash-Shura: 48]
However, Allah (swt) did mildly rebuke Him when he (pbuh) performed such duties as those that were associated with ruling. This was in conjunction with the actions that he performed whilst executing the rules that had already been revealed and conveyed. Allah (swt) in those cases reproached Him for acting contrary to the things that He (pbuh) considered more appropriate. Allah (swt) says:
“It is not fitting for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had thoroughly subdued the land.” [TMQ Al-Anfal: 67]
He also says:
“God give you grace! Why did you grant them exemption.” [TMQ At-Tauba: 43]
All this clearly demonstrates that the post of leadership and ruling over the Muslims is different from the post of Prophethood. It is also clear that the post of Khilafah is a temporal post and not one related to the Hereafter. We therefore, conclude from the preceding evidences that the Khilafah, which is a post of supreme leadership over all the Muslims in the world, is a human post and not a theological one. It is the post of ruling, which the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) held. He (pbuh) left that post with orders that a Muslim should succeed Him in that post of ruling and not that of Prophethood. It is thus a post of succession to the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) with regards to the leadership of the Muslims, for the implementation of rules of Islam and conveying its Da’wah, and not with regards to receiving revelation and the taking of the Shari’ah from Allah (swt).
As for the infallibility (‘Isma) of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), this results from the fact that he is a Prophet and not from being a ruler. This is because infallibility is an attribute of all the Prophets and Messengers, regardless of whether they themselves ruled people with their Shari’ah and implemented it or whether they just conveyed their Shari’ah without holding the post of ruler or managing its implementation. Musa, ‘Isa and Ibrahim (as) were all infallible, as was Muhammad (pbuh). Therefore, infallibility is for Prophethood and the Messengership, not for ruling. The fact that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) never committed a forbidden act (Haram) nor neglected a duty (Wajib) whilst executing the functions of ruling resulted from the fact that he was infallible with respect to Prophethood and Messengership and not because he was a ruler. Thus his execution of ruling does not require infallibility as such, but in reality he (pbuh) was infallible because he was a Prophet and a Messenger. He (pbuh), therefore, assumed his duties as a ruler just as any other human being, who rules over other humans, does. The Qur’an has clearly stated this, Allah (swt) says:
“Say, verily I am but a man like yourselves.” [TMQ Al-Kahf: 110]
Allah (swt) saying in the same verse outlines the difference between Him (pbuh) and other humans:
“(But) the inspiration has come to me.” [TMQ Al-Kahf: 110]
The distinction, therefore, lies in the fact that he (pbuh) received revelation, namely the Prophethood. Other than that he (pbuh) was a man like any other man. Therefore, in ruling he (pbuh) was human, and undoubtedly his successors (Khulafaa’) would also be humans just like any other human, because they would only be successors to Him in ruling, not Prophethood and Messengership. Infallibility does not therefore apply to the Khaleefah, as this is not required in ruling but it is a requirement of Prophethood. The Khaleefah is only a ruler no more, so the condition of infallibility is irrelevant to those who take up this post. It is even forbidden to stipulate infallibility as a precondition incumbent upon whoever takes up the post of Khilafah. This is because infallibility is restricted to the Prophets and it is forbidden to claim it on behalf of anyone other than a Prophet. The conveyance (Tableegh) of a Shari’ah requires the existence of infallibility in the Prophet and Messenger alone, so it is infallibility in the conveyance of the divine Message. Its realisation in the shape of not committing any sins follows the infallibility in conveyance (Tableegh). This is because the infallibility in Him would not be complete without the infallibility from committing the forbidden things. Thus infallibility is necessary for conveying of the Message and not for the people to believe or not in Him or for the occurrence or not of error in the actions. Rather what requires the infallibility is the conveyance of the Message and no more. If Allah had not made the Prophet or Messenger infallible it would then have been possible for Him to hide the Message or to add to it, or take away from it, or fabricate things which Allah did not say, or make a mistake by proclaiming other than what he has been ordered to convey. All these matters contradict with the conveyance of a Message from Allah (pbuh), and for being a Messenger, who must be believed in. Therefore, it was necessary that the Messenger be characterised by infallibility (‘Isma) in proclaiming the Message, and accordingly his infallibility from committing sins follows. Therefore the scholars differed over the infallibility (‘Isma) of the Prophets in the issue of committing the forbidden things (Al-muharramaat). Some of them said he is infallible from committing the major sins (Al-kabaa’ir) only and it is possible that he commits minor sins (As-saghaa’ir). Some of them said that he is infallible with regards to both major and minor sins. They said that because the perfection of proclamation depends on the actions. If the perfection of the proclamation depends on the actions, then the infallibility in the proclamation will include the actions. Accordingly, the Prophet will be infallible from committing sins, since the proclamation will not be perfected unless he is infallible in the actions. But if the perfection of the proclamation does not depend on the actions, then the infallibility does not include them. Thus, he will not be infallible from them, because the proclamation would then be perfected without them. This is why there is no difference amongst the Muslims that the Prophet (pbuh) was not infallible from doing actions other than those that Allah considered more appropriate, because the perfection of proclamation definitely does not depend upon these actions. Thereupon, the infallibility (‘Isma) is only specific to the proclamation, and thus it does not exist except for the Messengers and the Prophets and it is not allowed to be for other than them absolutely.
However, the evidence of the infallibility is rational and not textual. Thus, it is the mind that necessitates that the Prophets and Messengers be infallible in the conveyance of the Message. For being a Messenger or a Prophet requires it, otherwise he would not be a Messenger or a Prophet. It is also through the use of the mind that the one who is not commanded to propagate a Message from Allah is not allowed to be infallible, because he is a human being. By the nature that Allah made innate in Him he is subject to error and forgetfulness. Since he is not commanded with a Message from Allah there is no cause that requires Him to be infallible. If a person claims he is infallible then this implies that he is commanded with a Message from Allah, something that is not allowed, because there is no Prophet after Muhammad (pbuh). Allah (pbuh) says:
“He is the Messenger of Allah and the seal of the Prophets.” [TMQ Al-Ahzab: 40]
Hence, a claim of infallibility is in fact a claim of a Messengership. This is because the Messenger is conveying a Message from Allah, and being a human has the capacity to make mistakes and err in the Message from Allah, infallibility is required to prevent the Message of Allah from change or alteration. Thus, the Messenger must be infallible to protect Him from falling into error or making mistakes. It is for this reason alone that infallibility is one of the characteristics of the Messengers and Prophets and it is only they who require this infallibility. If infallibility is claimed by anybody other than a Messenger then it means that this person claims the purpose and the cause of infallibility, which is the conveyance of the Message i.e. he would claim that he is commanded with conveying a Message from Allah. Therefore, it is not allowed to stipulate infallibility to the Khaleefah, because making infallibility a condition upon Him implies that he is commanded to proclaim a Message from Allah that makes it necessary for Him to be infallible, a matter that is not allowed.
From this, we deduce that the Khaleefah is a human being and it is accepted that he might make mistakes, be absent minded, forgetful as well as lie, betray, commit sin and other things. This is because he is not a Prophet or a Messenger, but just a normal human being. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) has informed us that the Imam may make a mistake and he informed that the Imam may do things which people hate and curse Him for, like oppression, disobedience and other things. He informed us that open Kufr may appear from the Imam. Muslim reported on the authority of Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said:
“Verily the Imam is but a shield from behind which the people fight and by which they protect themselves. So if he ordered to observe the Taqwa of Allah and he was just he would have equal to these (actions) in reward, and if ordered other than that it would be against Him equal to that.” This means that it is possible that the Imam may command with other than the fear of Allah. Muslim also narrated from ‘Abdullah who said: “The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said;
‘There would be after me selfishness and matters which you hate.’ They said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, how do you order the one of us who would witness that?’ He (pbuh) said, ‘You should offer the right due upon you, and you ask Allah the thing which is due to you.’”
Muslim narrated from ‘Auf ibn Maalik that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said:
“‘The best of your Imams are those whom you love and they love you and you pray for them and they pray for you, and the worst of your Imams are those whom you hate and they hate you and you curse them and they curse you.’We asked; ‘O Messenger of Allah, shall we not then declare war on them?’ He said; ‘No, as long as they establish prayer among you. And if you see something which you hate in your rulers then hate the action and do not withdraw your allegiance of obedience.’” Al-Bukhari narrated on the authority of Junada ibn abi Umayyah who said: “We went to ‘Ubadah ibn as- Samit when he was sick and we said; ‘May Allah (swt) guide you. Inform us of a Hadith from the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) so Allah may benefit you from it.’ He said, ‘The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) called upon us and we gave Him the Bay’ah, and he said, of that which he had taken from us, that we should give Him the pledge to listen and obey, in what we like and dislike, in our hardship and ease, and that we should not dispute the authority of its people unless we saw open Kufr upon which we had a proof from Allah.’” ‘Aiesha narrates that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said;
“Avert the punishments from the Muslims as much as you can, so if the accused has any way out let Him go free, because it is better for the Imam to make a mistake in forgiving than to make a mistake in imposing the punishment.” [Narrated by at-Tirmithi]
These Ahadith clearly make the point that it is possible for the Imam to make a mistake, forget or disobey. Despite this, the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) has ordered the obedience to Him as long as he governed by Islam and no open Kufr occurred from Him and he did not command with sin. So, is there anything to be said after the news of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) about the Khulafaa’ that there would be from them things which Muslims deny despite the fact that he commanded Muslims to obey them? It is possible after this to say that the Khaleefah has to be infallible and he has not to be like other human beings? It is clear that the Khilafah State is a human state and not a theocratic state.