For exact meanings of words and sentences, please refer to the original Arabic book Nidham al-Islam.

[TMQ is Translation of the Meaning of Qurâan]

 

Contents

The Way to Belief
Al-Qadaa wal Qadar
The Intellectual Leadership of Islam
The Way to Carry the Islamic DaÎwah
The Islamic Civilisation
The Islamic System
Hukm ShariÎi
The Types of Ahkam ShariÎah
Sunnah
Emulating the Actions of the Messenger (saw)
Adopting Ahkam ShariÎah
Constitution and Canon
A Draft Constitution
Morals in Islam

 

---

The Way to Belief

Man revives according to what he carries in terms of thought about life, the universe and man, and about their relationship, as a whole, with what preceded life and what comes after it. Hence, in order for man to progress, it is necessary to radically and comprehensively change his current thought and generate another thought for him, because it is the thought that generates the concepts about things and concentrates them. Man shapes his behaviour in life according to his concepts about it. Hence, mans concepts about a person he likes shapes his behaviour towards that person in contrast with his behaviour towards a person he hates and towards whom he holds the concepts of hate, and also in contrast with his behaviour towards a person he does not know nor holds any concepts about. So, human behaviour is linked to mans concepts and when we wish to change the behaviour of the declined man and make it a refined behaviour, it is imperative to change his concepts first. Allah (swt) says:

"Allah does not change the circumstances of any people until they have changed what is within themselves." [TMQ 13:11]

The only way to change manâs concepts is by establishing the thought about life on earth in order to set up the correct concepts about it. The thoughts about life on earth will not be established in a productive manner in one's mind unless the thought about the universe, man, life, and about the reality before and after life, and the current lifeâs relationship with what is before and after it is set up. This can be achieved by giving a comprehensive thought about the universe, man and life, because this is the intellectual basis upon which all ideas about life are built. Giving this comprehensive thought about these matters is the solution to manâs greatest problem. Once this problem is solved all other problems are solved, because all other problems are either partial compared to the main problem or ramifications of it. This solution wouldn't lead to the correct progress, unless it is a sound solution which is compatible with manâs innate nature and which convinces the mind and thus fills the heart with tranquillity.

The true solution cannot be reached except through an illuminated thinking process about the universe, man and life. Consequently, those who yearn for progress and ways of intellectual ascension must first solve this problem in a correct manner by means of illuminated thought. This solution is none other than the Îaqeedah which serves as the intellectual basis upon which every thought generated about behaviour in life and about its systems is built.

Islam turned to the greatest problem of man and solved it in a manner that agrees with his nature, convinces his mind, and fills his heart with tranquillity. Islam made the intellectual acceptance of this solution a condition for embracing it. Therefore, Islam is built upon one basis, i.e., the Îaqeedah, which states there is a Creator behind the universe, man, and life on earth, there is a creator who created them all and created everything: He is Allah. And that this Creator created everything out of nothing. His existence is compulsory and He is not created - otherwise, He wouldnât be a Creator. His being a Creator makes it necessary that He is not created and that His existence is imperative because all things depend for their existence on Him and He does not depend on anything.

The things which are comprehensible to the mind, man, life, and the universe, are limited, weak, imperfect, it is imperative for them to have a Creator. Man is limited, because he grows in every aspect (intellectually and physically) to a certain limit that he cannot surpass. Life is limited, because it manifests itself only in individuals and ends with the individual. The universe is limited, because it is the sum of celestial bodies, and each body is limited, and the sum of limited things is irrefutably limited. Thus, man, life, and the universe are definitely limited. When we ponder on the limited things, we see that they are not azaly (eternal - having no beginning or end), otherwise they could not be limited, and therefore, they must be created by something else, which is the Creator of man, life and the universe? This Creator, is either created by someone else, created himself, or eternal and self-subsistent. It is absolutely false that he is created by someone else, because if so this entity would be limited and could not be rationally considered as the Creator. As for being self created, the ramification of which would be simultaneously being created by himself and creating himself. This is simply absurd. Hence, the creator whose existence is imperative must be eternal and self-subsistent. He is Allah.

Anyone who has the mental faculty can comprehend from things that can be sensed that they have a creator. Since they are perceived to be imperfect, weak and dependent, they are definitely created. Therefore, it is sufficient to draw oneâs attention to anything in the universe, life and man to conclude that there is a creator and an organiser. Hence, looking at any celestial body of the universe, contemplating upon any facet of life, or considering any aspect of man, gives definite evidence to the existence of Allah. Therefore, we see that the Qurâan draws attention to these things and instructs man to ponder upon them, their surroundings, and what is related to them, and to conclude from his pondering the existence of Allah. If man studies and concludes how things are in need of other things, he will definitely comprehend that the Creator exists. There are hundreds of Qurâanic ayat expressing this meaning. In surah Aal-Imran, Allah says:

"Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alteration of night and day, these are indeed signs for men of understanding." [TMQ 3:190]

and in surah ar-Rum,

"And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. Lo! herein indeed are signs for men of knowledge." [TMQ 30:22]

and in surah al-Ghashiya,

"Will they not look at the camels, how they are created! And the heaven, how it is raised! And the mountains, how they are set up! And the earth, how it is spread!" [TMQ 88:17-20]

and in surah al-Tariq,

"So let man reflect from what he is created. He is created from a gushing fluid, that is issued from between the loins and ribs." [TMQ 86:5-7]

and in surah al-Baqarah,

"Lo in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of night and day, and the ships which run upon the sea with that which is of use to men, and the water which Allah sends down from the sky, thereby reviving the earth after its death, and dispersing all kinds of beasts therein, and in the ordinance of the winds, and the clouds obedient between heaven and earth are signs (of Allahâs sovereignty) for people who have sense." [TMQ 2:164]

In addition, there are so many ayat that call upon man to ponder deeply upon things and their surroundings and that which is related to them, so that his belief in Allah is firmly established through reason and clear evidence.

Indeed, belief in the Creator, is innate in every man, but such innate belief comes through his emotions, a path which neither leads to trustworthy results nor to accuracy if left alone. The emotions often add mythical and unfounded ideas to the original belief. These unwarranted elements of belief causes one to further stray from the correct belief and catapults one into Kufr and infidelity. Idolatry, superstitions, and mythology are the outcome of mistakes of the emotional faith. Therefore, Islam does not leave the emotions as the only way to belief, so as not to ascribe certain attributes contradictory to divinity, or to consider Allah incarnated in material substances, or to perceive the possibility of approaching him through worshipping material substances whether they are icons or idols, thus, leading to Kufr or shirk, or to fantasies and superstitions all of which are renounced by true faith. That is why Islam compels the use of a conscious mind with the emotions and obliges the Muslim to use his mind to believe in Allah and forbids imitation in Îaqeedah. Therefore, Islam assigned the mind as the arbitrator in belief in Allah and forbids imitation in Îaqeedah. Allah, says:

"Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alteration of night and day, these are indeed signs for men of understanding." [TMQ 3:190]

Every Muslim must have his conviction and belief based on reasoning, thinking, and pondering, and to assign his and her intellect the role of absolute arbitration in the conviction in Allah (swt). The call to look deeply in the universe to understand its law and to be guided to the belief in the Creator is repeated in the Qurâan hundreds of times in many surahs, all of which are directed to manâs faculty, inviting him to think deeply and to ponder so as to base his belief upon reason and clear evidence, and warning him not to imitate his forefathers without investigating, scrutinising, and being ensured in its correctness. This is the belief which Islam called for and not the so called faith of the elders and ancestors. It is the faith of the illuminated and absolutely assured person who searched and contemplated until he came through contemplation and thinking to the assured existence of Allah.

Despite the mandatory use of the mind to arrive at the correct belief in Allah (swt), man is unable to comprehend things beyond the boundaries of his senses and mental faculty because manâs mind is limited regardless of how much it develops and grows. Hence, its ability to comprehend is limited, and consequently falls short of comprehending the essence of Allah (swt), because He is beyond the universe, man and life, and the human mind cannot comprehend what is beyond man. Thus, the human mind is unable to comprehend what Allah is. It shouldnât be said how does man believe in Allah with his mind while his mind cannot comprehend what Allah (swt) is? Because belief entails possessing a conviction in the existence of Allah, Who is comprehensible through the existence of His creation, i.e., universe, man and life. These are within the limits of what the mind can conceive and thus, man comprehends them, and from this he can comprehend the existence of a creator who is Allah (swt). Therefore, the belief in the existence of Allah is rational and within the limits of manâs fixed mental capacity. Comprehending Allahâs essence is impossible since He is beyond the universe, man and life, and hence He is beyond the capability of any mind. The mind is unable to comprehend what is beyond its bounds because of its inherent limitation to do so. This limitation itself should be one of the factors which strengthens the belief and not a source of suspicion and doubt. Moreover, since our belief in Allah is reached through our mind, our comprehension of His existence is complete. And since our sensing of His existence is linked with the mind this sensing is absolutely sure. Thus, this initiates in us a complete comprehension and assured feeling of all the divine attributes associated with the Creator. All of this convinces us that we will be unable to comprehend the essence of Allah, despite our firm belief in Him. Therefore, we have to submit to all that He has informed us about, which the mind is powerless to conceive or to arrive at its comprehension due to the natural inability of the human mind by its relative and limited standards to comprehend what is beyond it for this comprehension would need absolute and unlimited standards which man neither possesses nor can afford to possess.

As for the proof of the need for messengers, it has been proven that man is created by Allah (swt) and that religiousness is innate in man, since it is one of his instincts. Thus, man, by his nature, sanctifies his Creator, and this sanctification means worship, which constitutes the relationship between man and his Creator. Leaving this relationship without organisation will lead to turmoil and to worshipping other than the Creator. Therefore, it is necessary to organise this relationship with a correct system which cannot emanate from man himself, because he cannot comprehend what the Creator is in order to set up this relationship with Him. Hence, this system must come from the Creator. Since the Creator has to convey this system to man, there should be messengers to convey to the people the religion of Allah (swt).

Further evidence of the peopleâs need for messengers is that the fulfilment of manâs instincts and organic needs is a necessity. If this satisfaction were left without a system it would lead to an erroneous and abnormal fulfilment and thus result in manâs misery. Therefore, it is necessary to have a system to organise manâs instincts and organic needs and this system does not come from man, because his understanding of the organisation of manâs instincts and organic needs is liable to disparity, differences, contradiction and being influenced by the environment in which he lives. If this organisation was left to man, the system would be liable to disparity, differences and contradiction which would lead to manâs misery. Therefore, this system must come from Allah (swt).

As for proving that the Qurâan is revealed by Allah, it is well known that the Qurâan is an Arabic book conveyed by Muhammad (saw). Thus, it is either from the Arabs, from Muhammad, or from Allah, and it is not possible that it be from any other except these three since it is Arabic in language and style.

It is false to say that the Qurâan comes from the Arabs because it challenged them to bring forth any similar to it.

"Say, bring ten surahs like unto it." [TMQ 11:13]

"Say, bring one surah like unto it." [TMQ 10:38]

And they tried to bring the like of what they were challenged with but they failed to do so. Hence, this book is not their speech because they were unable to bring the like, though it challenged them, and they tried to do so. It is also false to say that it is from Muhammad, since Muhammad is one of the Arabs, and whatever the height of his genius, he was still a human being and a part of his community and nation. Since the Arabs themselves had failed to bring the like, this also applies to Muhammad, the Arab, that he could not bring the like of it. Thus, it is not from him. Moreover, Muhammad (saw) has left hadith sahih and hadith mutawatir, whose authenticity is beyond refute that speaks to this issue. If any of these ahadeeth were to be compared with any verse of the Qurâan, there would be no similarity between them in style, even though he (peace be upon him) used to utter the revealed verse and say the hadith at the same time. Whenever any man attempts to disguise his words, he will remain similar in style, because his words are a part of him. Since there is no similarity between the hadith and the verse in style, the Qurâan is absolutely not Muhammadâs words. Besides this, none of the Arabs, who were the most acquainted with the styles of the Arabic speech, alleged that the Qurâan is Muhammadâs words, or that it is similar to his words. The only thing that they claimed was that Muhammad had brought it from a Christian youth called Jabber. Allah (swt) refuted what theyâd said and responded:

"We know indeed that they say it is a man that taught him. The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear." [TMQ 16:103]

Since it is proved that the Qurâan is neither the words of the Arabs nor the words of Muhammad, it is definitely the words of Allah, and consequently it is a miracle for the one who brought it. And because Muhammad brought the Qurâan, and the Qurâan is the words of Allah and His divine law, and because no one brings Allahâs ShariÎah (law) except the prophets and the messengers, then accordingly Muhammad must definitely be a prophet and messenger, by intellectual proof.

This is an intellectual proof for the belief in Allah and in the message of Muhammad, and that the Qurâan is the speech of Allah.

Consequently, the belief in Allah comes through the rational way and this Iman must be by rational way. And because of it being so it becomes the basis for the belief in all matters beyond our senses and of all that Allah informed us. Because we believe in Allah, Who has divine attributes, we must definitely believe in everything that He (swt) has informed us of, whether it is mentally comprehended or beyond the minds capability. Henceforth, we must believe in the Day of Judgement, in paradise and hell, in reward and punishment, in angels, in jinn, in Shaytan and all others that the Qurâan or the hadith mutawatir has mentioned. This belief, though it is through narration and hearing it is originally rational, since its origin is confirmed in an intellectual manner. Therefore, the Muslimâs Îaqeedah must depend on reason or on that whose origin is confirmed through the reason. Thus, Muslims must believe only in what is proven intellectually through the rational way or the definite narration, that is, what is confirmed by the Qurâan and the hadith mutawatir. Belief in anything not deduced through these two methods (i.e. the mind and the text of the book and of the definite hadith) is prohibited, because Îaqeedah should be based on certainty and assurance.

Therefore, there must be Iman in what is before this life, Allah (swt), and in what is after it, the Day of Resurrection. Since the commands of Allah constitute the relationship of this life with what is before it, besides the relationship of creation, and the reckoning of oneâs deeds in the life of this world is the relationship of the Hereafter with the life of this world, in addition to the relationship of Day of Judgement, there should be a relationship between the life of this world with that which is before it and what will be after it. Manâs situation in this life must be constrained by this relationship. In other words, man must proceed in his life in accordance with Allahâs system, and must believe that all his deeds herein will be reckoned with on the Day of Judgement.

By this discussion, the illuminated thought has been established concerning what is beyond the universe, man and life, and about what is before the life on earth and what is after it, and that there is a relationship with what is before and after it. Hence, the greatest problem has been completely solved by the Islamic Îaqeedah.

Once man has achieved this solution, he can move to the thought about life on earth and to establish sound and productive concepts about it. This solution itself becomes the basis upon which the ideology is built, which serves as the method of intellectual progress (nahda) as well as the basis upon which the civilisation of this ideology rests, the basis from which its systems emanate, and the basis upon which the state is established. Thus, the basis upon which Islam is established, both in thought and method, is the Islamic belief or Îaqeedah.

"O you who believe! Believe in Allah and His messenger, and the Book which He sent to His Messenger and the Book which He sent to those before (him). Any who denies Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Day of Judgement, has gone far, far astray." [TMQ 4:136]

After this has been confirmed and the Iman in it is an inevitable matter, every Muslim is obliged to believe in the Islamic ShariÎah as a whole, because it is included in the glorious Qurâan and the Messenger (prayer and peace be upon him) conveyed it. Otherwise, he would be a Kafir. Therefore, it is Kufr to deny any of the Ahkam ShariÎah, whether these ahkam (judgements) are connected with ibadat, transactions, punishments, food, etc. Like rejection of the verse

"So establish regular prayer" [TMQ 2:43]

is the same as rejecting the verse

"But Allah has permitted trade and forbidden usury," [TMQ 2:275]

and is the same as rejecting the following verses:

"As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands," [TMQ 5:38]

"Forbidden to you (for food) are dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which has been invoked the name of any other than Allah." [TMQ 5:3]

The adherence to the ShariÎah is not only based on the mind. Instead, one must surrender completely to all that was revealed from Allah, whether it seems reasonable or not.

"But no, by your Lord, they can have no (real) faith, until they make you judge in all the disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions, but accept them with the fullest submission." [TMQ 4:65]

 

---

Al-Qadaa wal Qadar

In surah Aâal-Imran, Allah (swt), says:

"Nor shall a soul die except by Allahâs leave, the term being fixed by writing." [TMQ 3:145]

In surah al-Aâraf, He (swt) says:

"To every people is a term appointed. When their term is reached, not an hour can they delay it, nor (by an hour) can they advance it (in anticipation)." [TMQ 7:34]

In surah al-Hadeed, He (swt) says:

"No misfortune can happen on earth nor in your souls but it is recorded in a decree before We bring it into existence. That is truly easy for Allah." [TMQ 57 :22]

In surah al-Tawbah, He (swt) says:

"Say: Nothing will happen to us except what Allah has decreed for us. He is our Protector and in Allah, let the Believers place their trust." [TMQ 9:51]

In surah Sabah, He (swt) says:

"From Whom is not hidden the least little atom in the heavens or on earth, nor is there anything less than that, or greater, but it is in the Clear Record." [TMQ 34 :3]

In surah al-Anâam, He (swt) says:

"He it is Who gathers you at night and knows that which you commit by day. Then He raises you again to life, that the term appointed (for you) may be fulfilled. And afterward unto Him is your return and He will show you the truth of all that you did." [TMQ 6:60]

In surah al-Nisaâa, He (swt) says:

"If some good befalls them, they say: This is from Allah. But if evil, they say: This is from you (O Prophet). Say: All things are from Allah. But what has come to these people, that they fail to understand a single fact?" [TMQ 4:78]

These ayat of the Qurâan, and other ayat similar in meaning, are used by many as evidences in the question of Qadaâa and Qadar. They derive the following understanding from these ayat: Man is compelled to undertake his actions; Man undertakes his actions under compulsion through the will of Allah (swt); and that Allah (swt), Himself, created man and his actions. They try to support their opinion by the saying of the Supreme:

"But Allah has created you and your handiwork!" [TMQ 37:96]

They also support their point with the hadith of the Prophet (saw), such as: "The Holy Spirit inspired in my soul that no body will pass away until he accomplishes his livelihood, term of life (ajal), and decree."

The question of Qadaâa and Qadar has constituted much vital discussion amongst the Islamic schools of thought. In sum, those schools held the following views:

Ahle al-Sunnah: man had Kasb Ikhtiari in carrying out his actions. The Kasb Ikhtiari means man shifts his power and will towards performing the action by his choice. However, Allah (swt) subsequently brings the action into existence. Thus, man is reckoned on the outcome of this choice.

Al-MuÎtazila were of the opinion that it is man himself who creates his deed and therefore since he initiates the action, he is judged based upon them.

Al-Jabriya held the opinion that Allah (swt), the Supreme, creates man and his work and thus man is not free but compelled to carry out his actions like the feather which floats in the air according to the direction of the wind.

However, when studying this question thoroughly one needs to know the basis upon which the argument is built. This basis should not be whether the actions of man are created by himself or by Allah (swt); It shouldnât be the knowledge of Allah (swt), i.e., that He (swt) knows that man will perform an action and that His (swt) knowledge covers manâs actions; Itâs also not over the will of Allah (swt) related to manâs actions, i.e., that these deeds must happen because of this will; It shouldnât be whether or not manâs actions are recorded in the Al Lauh Al Mafouh (Protected Decree or Register), and thus having to carry out his actions in accordance with what is recorded.

Indeed, the basis of this question should not be any of these things, since they have no relationship to the subject of Reward and Punishment. It is merely related to the question of creation, the knowledge covering everything and the will of the Creator relative to all possible matters, and the Al Lauh Al Mafouh including everything. This relationship is different from the subject of Reward and Punishment for the action. In other words, is man obliged to perform an action, good or bad, or does he have a choice? And does man have the choice to perform an action or give it up, or doesnât he have the choice?

Any individual who observes the actions of man can conclude that He lives within two spheres:

A. The sphere which man dominates. This sphere is in his performance domain and includes actions performed by man by his choice.

B. The sphere which dominates him and in which he is involved. Actions which occur within this sphere occur without his choice, whether they originate from him or fall upon him.

In regards to the actions that materialise within the sphere that dominates man, man has no choice in them or in their existence. They can be divided into two kinds:

A. The part mandatory by the law of the universe.

B. The second being actions which occur beyond manâs control (but are not part of the universal law).

As far as the actions which are part of the law of the universe are concerned, man is in complete and involuntary submission to them. He is obliged to act in accordance with a specific and unchangeable system. Subsequently, manâs actions in this sphere occurs without his will and he is obliged and has no choice. Consequently, man came to this life without his will and he will leave it without his will. He cannot fly in the air with his body, walk in his natural being on water, nor choose the colour of his eyes. Man did not produce the shape of his head nor the size of his body. Indeed, it was Allah (swt) who created all of this without any input from man. Allah (swt) created the laws of the Universe, regulated the Universe by this law, and had the Universe run according to these laws without the possibility of change.

Actions which are beyond manâs control and yet are not part of the universal law, but cannot be avoided are deterministic. Either he is the subject or the object (unintentionally) of these actions. Examples of such actions are if someone on a wall accidentally falls on a person and thus kills that person, or if someone shoots at a bird and without any intent hits a person and kills him, or if a car goes off the way, train derails, or plane should crash, without any ability on the part of the pilot or the driver to avoid the accident, the passengers die. All of these examples which emanated from man or involved him materialised without his will and were beyond his ability to control them. Those actions are within the sphere which dominates man, yet they are not part of universal law. They occur from him or affect him without his will and beyond his control sphere. All of the actions which occur within the sphere that dominates man are termed Qada, since Allah (swt) has predetermined them. Therefore, man is not reckoned about these actions, whether they are classified as beneficial, harmful, liked or disliked - although Allah (swt) alone knows the good and bad consequences of these actions - because man has no influence on them. Man does not have enough information about them nor the manner in which they are brought into existence. Additionally, man is unable to initiate or to avoid them at all. Man must believe in this Qada and that this Qada is from Allah (swt).

As for Qadar, it is evident that the actions which occur, either in the sphere dominating man or in the sphere that man dominates, emanate from or upon things in the universe, man and life. Allah (swt) created certain attributes in these objects. For example, He (swt) created in fire the attribute of burning, in wood the attribute of catching fire, and in the blade the attribute of cutting. He (swt) made the attributes an integral and perpetual part of the objects according to the laws of the universe. When it happens that the attributes are no longer present, it means Allah has eliminated them and such an event would be unnatural. These are miracles and only happen to the. Likewise, in the manner that Allah (swt) created attributes in the objects, He created in man instincts and organic needs. He (swt) created in the instincts and organic needs specific attributes. Hence, He (swt) created in the instinct of reproduction the attribute of sexual inclination and worship, and survival. He (swt) created the organic needs the attributes of hunger/thirst, and He (swt) made these attributes accompany those instincts and organic needs according to the necessity of existence. The particular attributes that Allah (swt) has created in objects, instincts and organic needs are collectively termed as Qadar. This is because Allah (swt) alone created the objects, instincts, organic needs and pre-characterised (Qaddara) them with particular attributes. These attributes are not produced by the objects nor does man have any input or influence on their existence. Therefore, man must believe that it is Allah (swt) who has decreed these attributes in objects. However, these attributes can be used as means for an action by man. Thus actions will either be according to the commands of Allah and is thus good, or contradicting his commands and therefore bad (using objects with attributes or responding to his instincts and organic needs). Manâs action can conform or run counter with the commands of Allah (swt), thus doing good if it is in conformance with Islam and bad if it is not.

Accordingly, all actions - good or bad - that occur within the sphere that dominates man are from Allah (swt). Also, all the attributes of objects and the instincts and organic needs - whether resulting in good or bad - are from Allah (swt). Consequently, a Muslim must believe that Qadaâa - good or bad - is from Allah (swt) i.e. that actions beyond his sphere of influence are from Allah. He must also believe that Qadar - good or bad - is from Allah (swt) i.e. he must believe that attributes of things found in their nature are from Allah whether those resulting in good or in bad effects and unto which man has no influence. Thus manâs lifespan (ajal), provision (rizq), and himself (ruh) are all from Allah (swt). On the same token, the sexual inclination, and tendency towards ownership found in the instincts or reproduction and survival, and thirst and hunger, of the organic needs, are all established in man by Allah (swt).

This is in respect to the actions that occur within the sphere that dominates man and the attributes of all things. As for the sphere that man dominates, it is the sphere in which he proceeds freely according to the system he chooses, whether it is Allahâs law (ShariÎah) or any other. In this sphere, actions carried out by man or involving him occur by his free will. For example, he walks, eats, drinks and travels at anytime, wherever or whatever he likes. Likewise, he refrains from doing any of these things when he likes. He also uses fire and cuts with a knife when he chooses. He satisfies the instincts of reproduction and ownership and hunger of his stomach as he likes. He freely performs or abstains from any action. Therefore, man is reckoned on these acts which occur within this sphere.

The attributes in objects, instincts, and organic needs are ordained and are an integral part of creation established by Allah (swt). They influence the outcome of the actions but do not in themselves initiate the action. It is man himself who initiates the action when using them. Hence, the sexual inclination in the instinct of reproduction has the potential for good and bad, and the hunger present in the organic need has the potential for good and bad. The one who acts good or bad is man and not the instinct or the organic need. This is because Allah (swt) created for man the mind which has the ability to comprehend, distinguish, and decide. He also guides man to the awareness of the path of good and bad.

"And we showed him (the man) the two paths (of good and bad)." [TMQ 90:10]

Allah also creates in man the comprehension of vice and righteousness.

"And inspired it (with conscience of) what is wrong for it and what is right for it." [TMQ 91:8]

When man responds to his instincts and organic needs in a manner agreeing with the commands of Allah (swt), he performs the good and proceeds in the way of righteousness. When he responds to the instincts and organic needs deviating from the commands of Allah (swt), then he performs the bad and proceeds in the way of vice. Therefore, the good and bad emanates from man. He responds to the needs according to the commands of Allah and thus acts in a good way or responds in a way deviating from Allahâs (swt) commands and then acts badly. Consequently man is reckoned on this basis about his actions which occur in the sphere that he dominates, thus he is either rewarded or punished because he has undertaken those actions freely without any coercion.

Although the attributes of the instincts and organic needs are from Allah (swt), and their potential for good and bad is also from Allah (swt), Allah (swt) didnât establish them in a way forcing man to use them, whether in a way that satisfies or angers Allah (swt) i.e. in good or bad. This is similar to the attribute of burning which does not compel one to burn neither in the burning which satisfies Allah (swt) or in the burning which angers Him (swt) i.e. in good and bad. However, these attributes that are inherent in the objects, instincts, and organic needs are created in a specific manner and will manifest themselves whenever man fulfils the instincts and organic needs in the afforded way.

When Allah (swt) created man with his instincts, organic needs, and the mind, He (swt) endowed him with the choice to carry out or abstain from an action. Allah (swt) did not compel him to carry out or to abstain from the action. Furthermore, He did not make the attributes of the objects, instincts and organic needs as compelling factors that make man carry out or abstain from an action. Man is therefore free, to perform or abstain from an action by the use of his mind. Allah (swt) made man accountable because of the latter having a discerning mind. Accordingly, Allah (swt) will reward man for performing the good because his mind chose to obey the commands of Allah (swt) and Allah (swt) would punish for performing the bad because his mind chose to disobey the commands of Allah (swt) by responding to his instincts and organic needs in a way contrary to the commands of Allah (swt). Therefore, manâs accountability is righteous and just, because he is free to carry out his action without compulsion. In this question, the Qadaâa and Qadar is irrelevant. Itâs rather to do with man carrying out his actions freely and therefore he is responsible for what he receives. Allah (swt), the Supreme, says:

"Every soul is a pledge for its deed" [TMQ 74:38]

As for the knowledge of Allah (swt) (ÎIlmu Allah), it does not force man to carry out an action. Allah knows that man is going to freely undertake an action. To carry out this action is not based on the knowledge of Allah (swt), rather, the knowledge of Allah (swt) implies He knows what action man is going to carry out. With regards to "the writing in the Al-Lauh al-Mahfouh", it is an expression for the knowledge of Allah of everything.

With regards to the will of Allah (swt) (Iradatu Allah) also, it does not compel man to carry out any action. Its meaning, however, is that nothing can take place in his realm without Allahâs (swt) will i.e. nothing takes place against His (swt) will. Thus, if man carried out an action and Allah (swt) did not compel or prevent him from doing so, and instead left him to act freely, without any compulsion, then man has acted according to the will of Allah (swt). Manâs action was undertaken by himself and by his choice, and the will of Allah (swt) did not compel him to carry out the action.

This is the issue of al qadaâa wal qadar which will stimulate man to do good and avoid evil when realising that Allah (swt) is watching him and will account him for his actions and that he has endowed him with the choice to act or abstain. If man does not choose the right actions, he will be severely reprimanded and punished. Therefore, we find the true believer, who understands the concept of al qadaâa wal qadar and who is fully acquainted with the mental faculties and decision making capabilities that Allah (swt) has endowed him with, very careful in observing Allahâs (swt) orders and being afraid of Him (swt). He endeavours to comply with the commands of Allah (swt) and to abstain from what is forbidden, because of his fear of the punishment of Allah (swt) and his yearning for Paradise. Ultimately, the believer yearns to attain that which is greater than all of this, namely the pleasure of Allah (swt) (Ridwan Allah).

 

---

The Intellectual Leadership of Islam (Al-Qiyadatul Fikriyatu fil Islam)

Whenever the level of thinking declines, the wataniyah (patriotic bond) amongst people arises. It arises in a land to which they are attached. The survival instinct pushes them to defend themselves and the land they live on and automatically leads to the patriotic bond. This patriotic bond is the weakest and lowest level of bond, it is present amongst animals and birds as well as human beings.

It manifests itself in an emotional manner and is necessary in the event of a foreign aggression against the land, either when attacked or occupied. The patriotic bond never arises when the land is safe from aggression. It ceases when the foreigner is repelled or banished from the homeland. Therefore, this bond is primitive.

Moreover, when the thinking level is narrow, the qawmiyah (nationalism) arises. It is similar to a family bond though in a broader sense. Once the survival instinct is deeply rooted in the individual it manifests towards the inclination to dominate others. The inclination to dominate is individualistic in a man of low intellect. However, as the individuals horizon broadens his inclination to dominate widens, thus his attempts to dominate increases from his family, then to his people in the homeland and once that is achieved the dominance of his people over all other people becomes the objective. The struggle for dominance creates internal feuds amongst the members of the family. Hence, when the dominance within the family is settled then the feud transfers to a feud between his family and other families until the dominance is settled in favour of one family or a group of people from different families. In the end, the conflict arises between his people and others for dominance and achieving a high standard of living.

Racialism prevails amongst the people sharing this bond who are subject to whims and selfishness. Consequently, it is an inhumane bond and it remains exposed to internal feuds if it is not preoccupied with external conflicts.

Therefore, the patriotic bond is unsuitable for the following three reasons:

1. It is a primitive bond not serving to bind man with man in his quest for revival.

2. It is an emotional bond arising from the survival instinct of defending oneself. Such an emotional bond is liable to change and does not serve as a perpetual bond binding human beings.

3. It is a temporary bond that exists in the case of threat, but in the state of stability, which is the normal state of man, it does not exist. Therefore, the patriotic bond does not deserve to be a bond amongst mankind.

Whereas, the nationalistic bond is also unsuitable for the following three reasons:

1. It is a tribal bond which does not serve to bind man with man in his way for revival.

2. It is an emotional bond that arises from the survival instinct with its inclination to dominate.

3. It is an inhuman bond which causes conflicts for domination among people. Therefore, it does not deserve to be a bond between mankind.

As for the other invalid bonds which are mistakenly taken as bonds they are:

- Bond of self-interest (maslaha)

- Spiritual bond from which no system emanates.

The bond of self interest is a short lived bond and does not serve to bind mankind, since it is vulnerable to compromise in the pursuit of greater interests. Consequently, it ceases to exist when the interests are outweighed and if the interests differ the bond terminates. Additionally, it separates people from each other and when the interests are attained this bond ceases to exist. Therefore, it is a dangerous bond for its adherents.

The spiritual bond from which no system emanates appears in the practical status of religiosity and does not manifest itself in the walks of life. Therefore, the spiritual bond is partial and an impractical bond not suitable to bind people in the affairs of life. Hence, the Christian dogma did not serve as a bond amongst the European nations, though it is embraced by them, because it is a spiritual bond devoid of a system.

Consequently all the aforementioned bonds do not serve to bind man with man in his quest for revival. The only true bond which binds mankind in life is the rational doctrine from which a system emanates. And this is the ideological bond.

The ideology (mabda) is a rational doctrine from which a system emanates. The doctrine (Îaqeedah) is a comprehensive idea about the universe, man, life, what preceded this life, what is to follow it, and the relationship of this life with what preceded it and what is to follow it. As for the system that emanates from this doctrine, it is the solution for manâs problems, the method for implementing those solutions, preserving the doctrine, and conveying the ideology to others.

The method of implementing the solutions, preserving the doctrine, and conveying the ideology constitutes the tariqa (method) while the Îaqeedah and the solutions constitute the fikra (idea). Consequently, the ideology is composed of the idea and the method.

The ideology comes into existence through the mind of a man either through revelation sent to man from Allah (swt) combined with an order to convey it or through a genius capacity acquired by a man.

As to the ideology which comes into existence in the mind of a man revealed from Allah (swt). This is the correct ideology since, it is Allah (swt) who is the Creator of the universe, man and life. Therefore, it is conclusively a definite proven ideology. Whereas, the ideology which sparks in the mind of man because of his genius is false since it is developed by a limited mind which is not all knowing. Furthermore, manâs ability to set a system is liable to disparity, differences, contradictions, and influence of the environment in which he lives. A fact which produces a contradictory system leading to manâs misery. Therefore, the ideology which arises in a manâs mind is false in its Îaqeedah and system.

Consequently, the basis of the ideology is a comprehensive idea about the universe, man, and life and the method which brings the ideology into existence and implemented in all aspects of life, to ensure the existence of the ideology is mandatory. The comprehensive idea is the basis of the ideology since it constitutes the Îaqeedah and the ideological leadership. Based on the Îaqeedah, the ideological direction of man and his viewpoint in life is defined. Moreover, all thoughts are built upon it, and the solutions for lifeâs problems emanate from it. The method is essential, because if the system that emanates from the doctrine does not include the method of implementing such a system, preserving the Îaqeedah, and conveying daÎwah, then the idea would turn to be a hypothetical and fanciful philosophy in pages of books without any effect in the life.

Hence, the doctrine, the solutions for the problems, and the method are all necessary for the ideology to come into existence. However, the mere presence of the idea and the method from which a system emanates does not denote that the ideology is correct, it simply denotes that it is an ideology, and nothing more. The matter which determines the validity of the ideology is the Îaqeedah. Because the Îaqeedah is the intellectual basis upon which every idea is built, views are defined, and from which every solution and method emanates. Therefore, if the intellectual basis is correct the ideology will be correct, and if the basis is false the ideology will be false.

If the comprehensive idea (doctrine) is in harmony with mans nature and is built upon the mind it will be correct. However, if it disagrees with mans nature and is not built upon the mind it will be false. The compatibility with mans nature means that the Îaqeedah recognises the natural weakness and need of man for the Creator, the Sovereign, i.e., it agrees with the instinct of religiosity. Building the doctrine on the mind means that it is not built on materialism or a solution arrived through compromise.

If we examine the ideologies that exist in the world, we will find only three: Capitalism, Communism and Islam. The first two ideologies are implemented by states, while Islam is not carried by a state, but rather by individuals within different peoples, nevertheless it is internationally existent in the whole globe.

Capitalism is based upon the separation of religion from life. This idea constitutes its doctrine, its ideological leadership and its intellectual basis. According to this intellectual basis man lays the system for life and it is necessary to preserve for man the following types of freedom: freedom of belief, freedom of opinion, freedom of ownership and personal freedom. The Capitalist economic system has arisen out of the freedom of ownership and capitalism has become the most prominent feature that has sprung out from the doctrine of this ideology. Thus, this ideology is called Capitalism named after its most prominent aspect.

As for democracy, which is ascribed to this ideology, it stems from man laying his own system. The people are therefore, the source of authority. They determine the structure and function of the system, employ the ruler to govern them, and take away the authority from the ruler when they want to and establish for him the laws they like. This is because ruling is a contract between the people and the ruler to rule according to a system people choose to be applied.

Though democracy is a part of capitalism, it is less prominent than the economic system. Because the Capitalist economy in the West influences the government to the extent that the Capitalists are effectively the real rulers in the Capitalist countries which implement Capitalism. Moreover, democracy is not limited to this ideology, since the Communists also claim to be democratic and pretend that governing belongs to the people. It is therefore more accurate to call this ideology the Capitalist Ideology or Capitalism.

This ideology emerged when the emperors and kings of Europe and Russia were using religion as a means to exploit the people, transgress against them and suck their blood. The clergy was used as an instrument for this. There arose, as a result of the oppression, a bloody struggle in which the philosophers and thinkers went as far as denying religion. While, others acknowledged religion but called for its separation from life. Eventually, the opinion of the majority of the philosophers and thinkers settled on one idea, the separation of religion from life. It naturally resulted in the separation of religion from the state. Thus, the opinion settled on avoiding the discussion of religion, whether in denial or recognition, and instead confined discussion to the necessity of separating religion from life. This notion constituted a compromise between the clergy, on the one hand, who sought to control everything in the name of religion, and the philosophers and thinkers, on the other hand, who denied religion and theocracy. Therefore, this idea does not deny religion nor does it allow it to interfere in the life, instead it just separates it from life. Consequently, the doctrine which was embraced by the West is the separation of religion from life, and this doctrine is the intellectual basis upon which all thoughts are built, the basis for the intellectual direction of man and his viewpoint in life. It is the basis for solving all of lifeâs problems. It is the intellectual leadership carried and propagated in the world by the West.

The separation of religion from life implicitly recognises religion, and by doing so, it recognises that there is a Creator of the universe, man and life, and that there will be a Day of Resurrection. Since, these are the origins of religion as a religion. It provides an idea about the universe, man, life, and what preceded this life and what is to follow it because it didnât deny the existence of religion. When it claimed the separation of life from religion it actually confirmed its implicit existence. Therefore it proved the existence of religion and gave the idea that there is no relationship between this life with what preceded it and with what is to follow it, and that religion is a mere relationship between the individual and his Creator. Accordingly, this doctrine (separation of religion from life), by its all inclusive concept, constitutes a comprehensive idea about the universe, man and life. Thus capitalism, by this explanation, is an ideology like any other.

Socialism which led to Communism views the universe, man, and life as only matter and that matter is the origin of all things. The evolving of this matter brought all things into existence and thus there is nothing beyond matter. Therefore, matter has no beginning and no end, is everlasting and self-existing, i.e. not created by anyone. Communists, therefore, deny that matter is created by a Creator. They deny the spiritual aspect of matter and view the recognition of the spiritual aspect as constituting a threat to life. Consequently, they maintain that religion is the opium of the masses which sedates and hinders them from action. They believe in nothing but matter, even thought is claimed to be a reflection of matter on the brain. Hence, matter, for them, is the origin of thought and the origin of everything and through the materialistic evolution all things are brought into existence. Accordingly, they deny the existence of the Creator and consider matter to be eternal, and thus, they deny what preceded this life and what is to follow it and fail to recognise anything except this life.

In spite of the differences between these two ideologies in respect to their view about the universe, man and life, yet both agree that the ideals to be sought by man are the sublime values that man lays down for himself, while happiness is to enjoy the optimum level of sensual gratification which in their opinion are the means to happiness, even happiness itself. The two ideologies also agree upon preserving the personal freedom of the individual so man can act as he likes, however he desires, as long as he sees his happiness in that action. Therefore, the personal freedom of the individual is a part of what is sanctified by these two ideologies.

Both ideologies differ in their view of the individual and society. Capitalism is an individualistic ideology which assumes society to be composed of individuals. It pays secondary attention to society and concentrates its attention on the individual. Therefore, it considers it necessary to secure the freedoms of the individual. In order to ensure this freedom, every member works for the sake of society. Freedom of belief is, therefore, one of the things sanctified by this ideology. Freedom of ownership is also sanctified and not restricted by its philosophy but by the government which intervenes to guarantee the liberties. The government implements these restrictions by the police and through law enforcement. The state, however, is considered a means and not an end in itself. Sovereignty ultimately belongs to the individuals and not to the state. Accordingly, capitalism carries an ideological leadership, which is the separation of religion from lifeâs affairs, and on the basis of this leadership capitalism implements its laws, calls for, and attempts to be applied everywhere.

Socialism and Communism is an ideology which views society as a collective group consisting of human beings and their relationship with nature. Thus, people will submit to this relationship inevitably and automatically. This collective is one single unit of man, nature, and relationships, and all constitute one whole and not parts separated from each other. Nature is considered to be a part of mans character, the part he carries in himself. man does not evolve without being connected with this part of his personality, i.e., nature, because mans relationship with nature is like the relationship of the thing with its own essence. Accordingly, society is considered to be one unit whose three elements evolve together as a whole. And thus man has to revolve within this group like a spoke in a wheel. Therefore, Communists hold no freedom of belief or economical ownership for the individual; belief and economy are defined by the state. Consequently, the state is also one of the things sanctified by this ideology. From this materialistic philosophy, lifeâs systems have emanated and the economic system was considered the primary basis and the main factor in determining other systems. Hence Socialism and Communism carries an ideological leadership which is materialism and dialectic materialism and on this basis it implements its systems, calls for them and attempts to apply them everywhere.

As for Islam, it holds that beyond the universe, man and life, there is a Creator, who created them all. Therefore, its basis is the conviction in the existence of Allah (swt). This Îaqeedah has defined the spiritual aspect in everything, which means the creation of the universe, man and life by a creator. Likewise, the relationship of the universe with Allah (swt) and the relationship of the life and of man with Allah (swt) is the spiritual aspect of the universe, life and man. The spirit (ruh), therefore is manâs comprehension of his relationship with Allah (swt).

The belief in Allah (swt) must also be linked to the belief in the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw), his Message, and that the Qurâan is the speech of Allah (swt). Hence, it is obligatory to accept all that the Qurâan has informed us of.

Accordingly, the Islamic Îaqeedah makes it compulsory to believe in what had preceded this life (Allah), and to believe in that which is after this life - the Day of Resurrection. It also obliges man to believe that in this life he is restricted by the commands of Allah (swt); which constitutes the relationship with what preceded this life. Man will be reckoned as to whether he obeyed these commands. This accountability constitutes the relationship of this life with what is to follow it. Inevitably, a Muslim must realise his relationship with Allah (swt) when undertaking any action, and direct his actions according to the commands of Allah (swt). This is the meaning of mixing matter and spirit. The ultimate aim of directing Muslims actions according to the commands of Allah (swt) is to attain His (swt) pleasure. While the immediate end sought in undertaking the action is the value the action yields.

Therefore, the ideal aims to protect the society are not instituted by man, but rather by the commands of Allah (swt) which are consistent, neither adapting, changing, nor evolving. The protection of the human race, mind, human dignity, private property, religion, security and state are all fixed ultimate aims to protect society, and they are not subject to change or development. Islam has assigned a firm penal code to protect these aims. It is obligatory to protect these aims, because they are the commands of Allah (swt) and not because they produce material value. Accordingly, the Muslim and the state undertake all actions according to the commands of Allah (swt), because they and only they (the commands) should govern all of mans affairs. Undertaking actions according to the commands of Allah (swt) provides a Muslim with tranquillity. Hence, happiness is not satisfying the sensual gratification, it is rather attaining the pleasure of Allah (swt).

In respect to mans organic needs and instincts, Islam has organised them in a way that ensures their satisfaction such as the spiritual requirement, along with the dietary and sexual needs. However, this is not done at the expense of some over the others, or by suppressing or setting others loose, or setting all of them loose. Instead, Islam has co-ordinated all of them and satisfied them through a precise system which produces delight and comfort for man and prevents him from lapsing to the level of the animal which satisfies its instincts in a chaotic manner.

To maintain this organisation of organic needs and instincts, Islam considers the community to be an indivisible whole, and rather views the individual as an attached part of the community, and being a part of the community, the individual is not perceived as a spoke in a wheel, rather the individual is viewed as a being a part from a whole like a hand being a part of the body. Thus, Islam took care of the individual as part of a community and not separate from her such care leads to the protection of the community. At the same time, Islam took care of the community not as being a whole devoid of parts, but in her capacity as a whole comprising parts i.e. individuals. So this given care leads to the protection of these individuals, each as a part of the community. Prophet Muhammad (saw) said: "The example of those who maintain Allahâs limits and those who surpassed the limit is like the example of those who share a boat. Some would occupy the lower while others the upper deck. The occupants of the lower deck would have to go to the upper deck to have access to the water. They said, why donât we drill a hole in the lower deck to directly access the water so as not to cause any inconvenience to those above us. If those on the upper deck allowed this to happen then the entire boat with all the passengers would sink. However, if they prevented them from doing so then all would be saved".

This outlook of the community and the individual establishes a distinct concept about society. The individuals as part of the community must have thoughts that bind them together by which they live. They must also share the same sentiments which affect and motivate them. Additionally, they must have one system to address all of their lifeâs problems. Hence, society is composed of individuals, thoughts, sentiments and systems. man has to be bonded in this life by these thoughts, sentiments and systems. A Muslim is, therefore, bonded in all matters of this life by Islam and he does not have freedoms at all, since a Muslimâs Îaqeedah is restricted by Islamâs commands and is not left unrestricted. Consequently any one who renounces Islam is considered to have committed a capital crime and his apostasy is met with capital punishment if he does not repent. Similarly, personal matters are restricted by the system of Islam. Hence, zina is a crime for which the adulterer is severely punished without any pardon and in public. Allah (swt) says:

"And let a party of the believers witness their punishment." [TMQ 24:2]

Drinking khamr is a crime that also invokes punishment. Likewise, acts of aggression against others constitutes a crime that is treated case by case according to the type of aggression, such as false accusation of zina, murder etc. Economic aspects are restricted by the ShariÎah, by means of ownership permitted by the ShariÎah, and the manner by which Islam defined private property. Private property is defined as the ShariÎah permission to derive benefit from the owned property.

Consequently, transgressing these restrictions is considered a crime, which differs according to the type of transgression, such as theft, robbery, etc. Thus, a state which protects both the community and the individual and implements the system in the society is mandatory. It is necessary that the ideology influences its adherents so that its protection is naturally coming from the people themselves. Accordingly, it is the ideology which restricts and protects the entire society while it is the state which implements the legislation set by the ideology. Sovereignty, therefore, belongs to Allah (swt) and His (swt) ShariÎah not to the state or the nation, though, the authority belongs to the nation and is practised by the state. Hence, the state is the method for implementing the system, although the individuals piety (taqwa) of Allah (swt) can be relied upon for his adherence to the laws of Islam. Therefore, it is necessary to have the legislation implemented by the state and orienting the individual to comply by Islam through his taqwa.

Islam is therefore comprised of an Îaqeedah and systems and the Islamic ideology is both a fikra and a method which is an integral part of the fikra. Its system emanates from its Îaqeedah and its hadarah (civilisation) constitutes a unique way of life. The Islamic method in carrying the dawÎah is by implementation of Islam through the State and carrying it as an intellectual leadership to the world which should be the basis for understanding and practising Islam. Applying Islam on the people who are governed by the system of Islam is considered carrying a daÎwah, because applying Islam on non-Muslims is considered to be one aspect of the practical method for the daÎwah. It is through this implementation this vast Muslim world came into existence.

To summarise three ideologies exist in the world, Capitalism, Socialism and the third ideology is Islam. Each of these ideologies has its own doctrine from which a system emanates, a measure for manâs actions, a particular view of society, and a method to implement the system.

As for Îaqeedah the Communist ideology holds that matter is the origin of things and that all things emanate from is by means of materialistic evolving i.e. dialectic materialism.

The Capitalist ideology believes that religion must be separated from life which results in the separation of religion from the state. Hence, the Capitalists donât discuss the issue whether a Creator exists or not, they merely discuss the point which says that the Creator has no right to interfere in the life regardless of whether his existence is acknowledged or not. Consequently, those acknowledging the existence of a Creator and those who deny it are equal in the Capitalist doctrine which is the separation of religion from life.

As for Islam, it believes that Allah (swt) created everything in existence and that He (swt) sent prophets and messengers with His (swt) deen to human beings, and that man will account for his actions on the Day of Judgement. Therefore, Islamâs Îaqeedah is the belief (Iman) in Allah (swt), His angels, His books, His messengers, and the Qadaâa and Qadar, the good and bad of which are from Allah (swt). However, regarding the manner in which the system emanates from the doctrine, Communism maintains that the system is taken from the tools of production, thus the feudal system was the product of the dominant mode of production in the feudal society, namely the axe. The evolution of society to Capitalism made machinery become the tool of production, thus the Capitalist system is taken from this mode of production through dialectic materialism. Capitalism in separating religion from life, maintains that it is man who sets the system for this life based upon his situation. Islam considers that Allah (swt) has assigned a system for man to proceed in this life. He (swt) has sent Muhammad (saw) with this system which was revealed to him (saw) and man must follow it. Hence, a Muslim studies the problem and deduces its solution from the Qurâan and the Sunnah.

As the measure for actions, Communism considers materialism, i.e. the materialistic system, so as matter evolves so does the measure. Capitalism considers the measure to be benefit, and on this basis, actions are evaluated. Islam considers the halal and the haram as the measure, i.e. the commands of Allah (swt). Accordingly, the halal is performed and the haram shunned; the measure neither evolves nor changes, nor is it influenced by benefit, and thus it is only the ShariÎah which governs.

As for society Communism considers it consisting of a whole unit comprising of earth, modes of production, nature, and man which all are considered to be matter. When nature and its content evolve man evolves with it, thus the society evolves. Consequently, society is subjugated to evolving materialism. Therefore, man has to only bring forth the contradictions to promote this evolutionary process. When the society evolves the individual evolves with it and thus man revolves with the society like a spoke in a wheel.

Capitalism views society as composed of individuals. Hence, if the individualâs affairs are managed the societyâs affairs will be managed. Care is therefore, only given to the individual while the government acts only on the individualâs behalf. Consequently, this ideology is individualistic.

Islam views the Îaqeedah as the basis of society. This Îaqeedah includes its thoughts, sentiments and the system which emanates from it. Thus, the Islamic society is brought into being when the Islamic thoughts and sentiments dominate and the Islamic system is implemented among the people.

Society is therefore comprised of man, thoughts, sentiments and the system. For a person together with another person constitutes only a group. A society comes into existence when people adopt the same thoughts, share the sentiments, and apply the same system upon them. When people live together there arise common interests which requires. However, if thoughts, sentiments and systems this relationship amongst the people are united. If the thoughts about it or sentiments towards it or systems are different, then the relationship would not exists and consequently the society would not exist.

Therefore, society consists of man, thoughts, sentiments and systems, because these alone establish continuous relationships and make a group of people a distinct society.

If all people in a society were Muslims, but the thoughts they adopted were democratic and Capitalistic, their sentiments were spiritual, patriotic or nationalistic, and the system applied upon them was democratic and Capitalistic then the society would be non Islamic, even if the majority of the people were Muslims.

Concerning the implementation of the system, Communism considers that the state alone implements the system through an iron fist. The state develops the system and takes care of their affair on behalf of the individual and community. The government in capitalism oversees the sanctification of liberties. So if someone violated the freedom of an individual, then the government will act to prevent the violation. However, if someone did not violate the liberty of others rather, exploited and took away and took the individuals right, with his consent, then there would be no violation of liberty. The state would not interfere because again the state exists to maintain the liberties.

Islam considers that the system is implemented by the individualâs consciousness (taqwa) and by the state through: the awareness in society about Islamâs justice, the co-operation between both the nation and the ruler through amr bil maruf wa nahiy anil munkar (enjoining the good and forbidding the evil) and the authority of the state.

The state takes care of the community affairs and the affairs but not the individual unless if he is unable to do so and the system does not evolve at all. The state has the authority to adopt the rules (Ahkam ShariÎah) when there is more than one opinion of ijtihad on an issue.

The intellectual leadership of Islam is comparable with manâs nature and in spite of its depth it is easily understood. Oneâs heart and mind are quickly opened to it, eagerly trying to understand it, and pondering over its details with appreciation. This is because the instinct of religiosity is part of man. Every man is religious by nature and no power can remove from him this innate quality because its deeply rooted in him. Man, by nature, feels incomplete, and that there is a greater power which deserves to be sanctified. Manâs instinct of religiosity arises from his natural weakness thus constituting his need for the Creator.

It is a permanent instinct in man with specific manifestation requiring sanctification. Consequently, mankind is religious and has always worshipped something throughout history. Humanity has worshipped man, planets, stones, animals, fire and other things. Islam, however, with its doctrine came to lead man away from worshipping created things to the worship of Allah (swt) who created everything. The advent of the materialistic ideology, which denies the existence of Allah (swt) and our relationship with Him (swt), could not put an end to this innate religiousness. However, it succeeded in shifting manâs conception of power greater than himself to its reverence to the ideology and its advocates.

Thus, it shifted peopleâs sanctification of worshipping Allah (swt) to worshipping man, and away from venerating the ayat of Allah (swt) to venerating mans words. So it brought backwardness in mans worship. It could not put an end to religion, which is innate. Instead, it distorted and diverted it in a reactionary way.

Therefore, the intellectual leadership of the materialistic ideology (Communism) is a negative leadership incoherent with manâs nature and thus it is a failure from this perspective. It manipulates the people through appealing to their stomach. It attracts the deprived, the poor, and the defeated ones. Those who adhere to it are low in their thinking, the failures, anarchists and mentally devious people who aspire to be known as intellectuals when they arrogantly talk about the theory of dialectics whose failure is proved by both the intellect and in reality. It has to resort to force and brutality to subjugate people to its ideology. Hence, oppression, suppression, anarchy, turmoil, destruction and agitation are its most important instruments.

The Capitalistic ideological leadership likewise disagrees with manâs nature, i.e., the instinct of religiosity. This instinct of religiosity becomes apparent in sanctification as well as in management of manâs affairs in life. The inconsistency and contradictions appear when man undertakes this management, a matter which testifies to manâs inability.

Consequently, a deen revealed from the Creator must manage manâs affairs in life. The separation of religion from life contradicts manâs nature. The presence of religion in life does not mean viewing all of lifeâs daily functions as religious rites. Rather, the presence of religion in life means to address all of manâs problems with Allahâs (swt) system, a system that emanates from the Îaqeedah which agrees with manâs nature. To remove this and replace it with a system which emanates from the idea of separation of religion from life disagrees with manâs nature. Therefore, the intellectual leadership of Capitalism is negative since it fails to address manâs nature. It separates religion from life, banishes religiousness from life by making it an individualistic affair, and prevents Allahâs (swt) system from addressing manâs affairs.

The Islamic intellectual leadership is positive since it establishes the mind as the basis for the belief in the existence of Allah (swt). Islam draws manâs attention to the elements of the universe, man and life to conclusively and decisively deduce the existence of Allah (swt), the Creator of these things. This defines for man the utmost perfection which he innately searches for and does not exist in him, the life, or the universe and directs manâs mind to this utmost Supreme, comprehending His (swt) existence, and believing in Him (swt).

The Communist intellectual leadership is built upon materialism and not the intellect. It considers that matter existed before thought and matter to be the origin of all things, hence it is materialistic. The Capitalist intellectual leadership however, is based upon a compromise reached after a bloody struggle between the clergy and the intellectuals which had lasted for many centuries and it resulted with the idea of separation of religion from the state. Therefore, both the Communist and Capitalist intellectual leaderships failed since they contradict manâs nature and are not built upon the intellect.

In conclusion, of the three doctrines, only the Islamic doctrine is correct, because it is built upon the mind and it agrees with manâs nature and, thus man positively responds to it, whilst the other doctrines are not built upon the mind and they disagree with manâs nature.

The Communist doctrine maintains that matter precedes thought thus it is built on matter and not on the mind. It maintains that thought is the reflection of the matter onto the brain. Prior to the reflection of the matter onto the brain there was no thought, and accordingly everything is built upon matter. Consequently, the origin of the Communist intellectual leadership is matter and not thought.

This perspective is wrong for two reasons:

There is no reflection between the matter and brain. The brain does not reflect upon matter, neither does matter reflect on the brain. Reflection requires that objects be endowed with the characteristic of reflection such as a mirror. This characteristic is not possessed by the brain nor matter. Rather, the sensation of the matter is transferred to the brain through the senses. The sensation of the matter to the brain is not a reflection of matter to the brain, nor a reflection of the brain to the matter it is only the sensation of the matter. In this regard there is no difference between sight and the other senses in the sensing of the matter. Thus sensation occurs by smelling, hearing, touching and tasting as it occurs by seeing. Accordingly, man senses things through his five senses, and things are not reflected on the brain, rather what occurs is a sensation of the things.

Sense alone does not produce thought, but merely produces sensation, i.e., a sense of the tangible object. Sensation, plus sensation, plus a million sensations will still only produce sensations and no thought at all.

In order for man to think, he must have previous information through which he can explain the sensed matter. For example, if a book in the ancient Syriac language was given to someone who has no previous information about the Syriac language, he would be able to only sense it through sight and touch. Even if the individual would repeat this sensation a million times, he still would not be able to understand a single word of the book unless he is given the relevant information about the Syriac language. Thereafter, he will start thinking and understanding. Let us take another example of a child with sound senses but no previous information. If we were to place in front of the child a piece of gold, brass and a stone the child would not be able to comprehend them, no matter how many times it senses these things. However, if the child was given previous information about them, he would use this information to comprehend them. Were the child to grow up to be twenty years of age without any information he would remain as his first day of life regardless of the biological growth in the brain. Since it is not the brain that enables man to comprehend, rather it is the previous information together with the brain and the sensed object.

As for the instinctual behaviour, in contrast to the intellectual process in man, it results as a mere response to the instincts and organic needs, a matter which occurs with animals as well as man. For example, a baby recognises through giving him an apple and stone repeatedly, that the apple can be eaten while the stone cannot. Likewise, the donkey recognises that barley is eatable but soil is not. This differentiation occurs not through thought or intellect, but through the response to the instincts and the organic needs, which are present in animals and man. Thought cannot be produced unless previous information is coupled with the transference of the sensed thing through the senses to the brain.

Accordingly, the mind, intellect, or comprehension can be defined as the transmission of a sensed object through the senses to the brain and the existence of previous information by which this reality is explained. Therefore, the Communist intellectual leadership wrongly understood the meaning of the mind and the thinking process. Since the Communist intellectual leadership is not built upon the mind it is both a false and incorrect intellectual leadership.

The Capitalist intellectual leadership is built on a compromise agreed upon by the clergy and the intellectuals after their bloody conflict which lasted for many centuries. This compromised solution is the separation of religion from life i.e., the implicit acknowledgement of religion while separating it from life. Thus, the Capitalist intellectual leadership is not built on the mind, it is based on this compromise. Indeed, the idea of a compromise is deeply rooted in the Capitalists who draw the truth (haq) near to the falsehood (batil) and Iman near to Kufr the light (nur) near the dark (dhalam). The compromise on which they have built their doctrine and ideological leadership has made them swerve from the truth, the Iman and the light. Therefore, this ideological leadership is not built on the mind thus it is false.

However, the Islamic doctrine is built upon the mind, because it obliges the Muslim to believe in the existence of Allah (swt), in the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw) and the Qurâan, through the use of the mind. It obliges the Muslim to believe in the ghaib, (things beyond the senses) on the condition that it is mentioned in a source which was conclusively proven rationally like the Qurâan or hadith mutawatir. Thus, the Islamic creed is based upon the intellect.

This is from the rational perspective, however with regards to manâs nature, the Islamic intellectual leadership agrees with manâs nature since it recognises the existence of deen, its relevance upon life, and the obligation to manage the life according to the commands of Allah (swt).

Religiosity is innate in man since it is one of manâs instincts with its own reaction, namely, sanctification. Which is a natural response to a specific instinct which differs from all the other responses of other instincts. Thus, the belief in deen and the obligation to live according to the commands of Allah (swt) is instinctive. It agrees with manâs nature and therefore responds positively to man.

This differs from the Communist and the Capitalistic leaderships which disagree with manâs nature. The Communist intellectual leadership denies the existence of religion absolutely and opposes its recognition. Accordingly, it contradicts manâs nature. The Capitalist intellectual leadership neither recognises nor denies religion. It does not make the recognition or denial of religion an issue for discussion. However, it insist on the separation of religion from life and advocates that life be managed in a beneficial way with no relation to religion. Therefore, it contradicts manâs nature.

The Islamic intellectual leadership therefore, is the only correct intellectual leadership because it agrees with manâs nature and mind; all the other doctrines are false. Accordingly, the Islamic creed is the only correct and successful ideological leadership.

One question remains: Did the Muslims implement Islam? or did they only embrace its doctrine while implementing other systems and laws? The answer to this question is that Muslims implemented only Islam through all the ages from the arrival of the Messenger (saw) to Madinah until 1336 A.H, i.e., 1924 AD when the Islamic State collapsed at the hands of colonialism. The Muslims implementation of Islam was comprehensive and its success in its comprehensive implementation was overwhelming.

The practical implementation of Islam is undertaken by two entities having the responsibility to implement the system. They are:

The judge who is responsible for settling disputes between people, and, the ruler, who governs the people. It has been narrated through successive reports that the judges who settled the disputes between people from the time of the Messenger (saw) till the demise of the Khilafah in Istanbul, settled the disputes in all affairs with the laws of the ShariÎah. This is whether the disputes were between Muslims or between Muslims and non-Muslims. The courts that settled disputes, such as infringement of rights, family matters, criminal prosecution, etc. were under one single court based on the Islamic ShariÎah.

The clearest proof of this is contained in the records of the ShariÎah courts stored in the old cities of Jerusalem, Baghdad, Damascus, Cairo, and Istanbul etc. These records are a conclusive proof that only the ShariÎah was implemented by the judges. Even non-Muslims used to study and write Islamic fiqh like Saleem al-Baz, who wrote a commentary on al-Majalla. Laws that were introduced towards the demise of the state, were introduced on the basis of the scholars fatwa that such laws which do not contradict the Ahkam ShariÎah. Consequently, the ÎUthmani penal code was introduced for application in 1275 A.H (1857 AD.) and the Law of Rights and Trade was introduced in 1276 A.H (1858 AD.). This was followed in 1288 A.H (1870 AD.) by the separation of the courts into two: ShariÎah courts and regular law courts and a decree was passed to arrange for this separation.

In 1295 A.H (1877 AD.) a law was issued to regulate statuary courts. In 1296 A.H (1878 AD.) the Rights and Penalties Procedure was issued.

Since the Îulemah did not find any justification to use the civil law, which was put aside in 1286 A.H (1868 AD.) and the ShariÎah magazine (al-Majalla) issued a canon for transactions.

All these canons were issued as rules permitted by Islam and were not enacted except, as clearly spelled out in the decrees introducing the canons, after being permitted by the Sheikh al-Islam. The colonialist authorities since 1918 AD. have occupied some Islamic lands and were settling disputes over the civil cases according to non-Islamic laws. Whereas, those countries which were not physically occupied by colonialist armies, although still within their domain of influence, are still ruled judicially according to Islam, such as Afghanistan and the Arabian peninsula, i.e., Hijaz, Najd and Kuwait. These countries still run their judiciary according to the Islamic ShariÎah, although the rulers in these countries no longer implement Islam. Accordingly, we observe that Islam was implemented judicially and no other law was applied in the judiciary throughout all the ages of the Islamic State.

The implementation of Islam by the ruler is represented in Ahkam ShariÎah related to five areas: social; economics; education; foreign affairs; and ruling. The Ahkam ShariÎah relating to these matter were all implemented by the state.

The social system defines the relationship between men and women and the matters that arise as a result of this relationship i.e. personal status. Alone the ShariÎah is still applied in the social system in spite of the presence of the colonial powers in the Islamic lands and the presence of Kufr in the ruling system; definitely no other system has been implemented.

Concerning the economic system, it is characterised in two ways, firstly by the way in which the state collects public revenue in order to look after the peopleâs affairs. Secondly, by the way in which this revenue is spent. As far as collecting revenue is concerned, the State collects the zakat due on fund, land and livestock as an obligation of worship and is exclusively distributed amongst the eight categories mentioned in the Qurâan.

The State never used the zakat fund for managing its expenditures. The State collected the necessary funds for its expenditures according to the ShariÎah. It did not apply any system of taxation, instead it implemented Islam. Thus, it collected kharaj over the productive worth of the land, jizya an amount to be paid by non-Muslim males, who are in a good condition of work, and customs duties in its capacity as the supervisor of internal and external trade.

The State did not collect funds except according to the ShariÎah. As for distribution, the state had a nafaqah system (financial support) for the disabled, placed the safeeh (incompetent) and mubaddir (the one who spends his wealth on haram) under guardianship, and established lodgings in every city and along the roads to the pilgrimage to assist the poor, destitute, and the travellers, there relics can still be seen in major Muslim cities. The Stateâs expenditure was solely governed by the ShariÎah and by no other system. Any deficiency that may be noticed in this field was due to negligence and misapplication and not to the absence of the ShariÎah.

The foundation of the educational policy was Islamic and the Islamic culture constituted the basis of the curriculum. Care was exercised to ensure that foreign culture was not adopted if it contradicted Islam. The neglect in opening schools towards the demise of the Ottoman state was typical of all the Muslim countries at that time, due to the intellectual decline which reached its lowest level in that period. In all the other ages of the Islamic State, it was well known that only the Islamic land attracted the attention of the scholars and students. The universities in Cordoba, Baghdad, Damascus, Alexandria and Cairo had a tremendous effect on the course of education throughout the world.

The foreign policy of the Islamic State was founded upon Islam. The Islamic State built its relationship with all other states upon the basis of Islam, and all other states dealt with it as an Islamic State. All of its external relationships were based on Islam and the interests of Muslims. It is known all over the world that the foreign policy of the Islamic State was an Islamic policy, to the extent that no evidence is required.

With regards to the ruling system, the structure of the state in Islam is established upon eight pillars:

the Khaleefah, i.e., the head of State

the Khaleefahâs delegated assistants (Moâaawen Tafweed))

the Khaleefahâs executive assistants (Moâaawen Tanfeed)

the Governors (Wula)

the Judges (Qadi)

the armed forces (Jaysh)

the administrative apparatus (Idarah)

the consultative assembly (Majlis al-Shura).

This structure existed and Muslims have never been ruled without a Khaleefah until, by the hands of Mustapha Kemal, the disbelieving (Kafir) colonial powers abolished the Khilafah in 1342 A.H (1924 AD.). The existence of a Khaleefah for the Muslims, prior to its removal, had been continuous. Whenever a Khaleefah died or was removed, he was succeeded by another, even during the era of decline.

Since the Islamic State is the Khaleefah, it means that when a Khaleefah is present the Islamic State exists. As for his assistants, they were present in all ages and were assistants and not wazir. Although, they were named wazir during the ÎAbbassid era. The assistants did not possess the characteristic of ministers found in the democratic system at all they were assistants and an executive body only, while all the powers were in the hands of the Khaleefah.

The existence of the governors, judges, and administrative system was obvious. And when the colonial powers came and occupied the land, all the affairs had been running and there were governors, judges and the administrative apparatus on the spot.

As for the Islamic army it was renowned all over the world for being unbeatable. With regards to the Majlis al-Shura, after the era of the Khulafah ar-Rashidun, its existence was not given much attention. The reason for that is that the Majlis al-Shura is not a basis for ruling but rather a part of the stateâs structure and is one of the rights of the people. Thus, if the Khaleefah neglects it he would be negligent, but the ruling system would still remain Islamic. The shura (consultation) in Islam entails expressing opinion which are contrary to the parliamentary system in democracy which is viewed as a branch of ruling. Therefore, it must be clear that the Islamic ruling system was applied.

A question may arise concerning the bayÎah (pledge) to the Khaleefah. It is an established fact that there was no hereditary system in the Khilafah. In other words, unlike in monarchy, the leadership of the State could not be inherited. Instead, the leadership of the State would be acquired through receiving the bayÎah from the Muslims in some eras, from the influential people (ahle al-halli wal-Îaqd) in later eras or as what occurred towards the demise of the state from the Sheikh al-Islam. Throughout the ages of the Islamic State, the procedure was that no Khaleefah was appointed without receiving the bayÎah. Never was a single incident reported that the Khaleefah was appointed through inheritance without receiving the bayÎah. However, notwithstanding this, the manner of attaining bayÎah was misapplied. Thus, a Khaleefah would take a bayÎah from the people before his death for his son, brother, cousin, or any other individual of the family. After the death of the Khaleefah the bayÎah was renewed for that person. This is a misapplication of the bayÎah but it neither constitutes hereditary rule or succession to the throne. Likewise, the misapplication of the elections in a parliamentary or a democratic system is still called elections not an appointment even if the government backed candidates succeed in the elections.

Consequently, one must acknowledge that the Islamic system was applied throughout all periods of the Islamic State. As for the practical success of the Islamic ideology, it was without parallel particularly in the following two matters:

Firstly, the Islamic ideology transferred the Arabs from a low level of intellect in which they were acting haphazardly in the darkness of bloody family feuds and ignorance to an age of intellectual advancement glittering in the light of Islam whose sunrise was not restricted to the Arabs but prevailed all over the world. Muslims pursued in conveying Islam to the world, liberating in the process Persia, Iraq, the domain of al-Sham, (Syria, Lebanon and Palestine), Egypt and North Africa. These peoples had their own religion, nationalities, languages, customs and traditions. All were different from one another. The Persians differed from the Romans of Sham, from the Copts of Egypt and from the Berbers of North Africa, they lived under the rule of Islam, understood it, embraced it and became one nation (Ummah), the Islamic Ummah. The success of the Islamic ideology in melting these nationalities and people into one nation was therefore unparalleled. This is in spite of the fact that the ways of transportation was through camel and the means of communication was word of the mouth and the writing of the pen.

Al-Fath, however was to remove by force the physical obstacles to give the people free access towards what their minds and their innate readiness drive them to. In this manner people entered Islam in masses. On the other hand, the oppressive occupation of countries alienates the occupiers from the conquered. For example, the colonisation of the East by Western imperialism lasted for decades without gaining any result. If it was not for the influence of the deceptive Western culture and the oppression of its agents which will soon vanish, then the restoration of the Islamic ideology would be quicker than the blink of an eye.

Accordingly, the success of the Islamic ideology in forging all the various people into one Islamic Ummah is without parallel. These people have remained as Muslims even to this day, in spite of the ideological and material invasion by the colonial powers and their cunning ways of corrupting oneâs creed and thinking. These people will remain one Islamic nation (Ummah) till the Day of Judgement. It has never happened that any people (or ethnic group) which had embraced Islam have apostatised from it. As for the Muslims of Andalus (Spain), they were massacred by the Courts of Inquisition, the guillotine and burnt in ovens of the executioners. The Muslims of Bukhara, the Caucasus and Turkistan met with the same disastrous fate as those before them. The degree of success of the Islamic ideology and the application of Islam by the Islamic State can be ascertained by the evidence of all these people embracing Islam and becoming one Ummah with a determined awareness regarding her Îaqeedah.

The second matter which denotes the success of this ideology is the fact that the Islamic Ummah was the leading nation in the world in respect to civilisation, material advancement, culture and science. For twelve centuries, dating from the seventh century AD. to the middle of the eighteenth century AD., the Islamic State remained as the leading and most powerful state in the world. Throughout this period it was the flower of this globe and the rising sun amongst the nations, a fact which confirms the success of this leadership and the success of Islam in implementing its system and Îaqeedah upon the people. When the Islamic State and Ummah abandoned carrying its ideological leadership, falling short in understanding and applying Islam and neglected to convey the Islamic daÎwah, it lapsed and declined among other nations. Therefore, we say that only the Islamic intellectual leadership is correct and it alone should be carried to the world. When the Islamic State, which carries this leadership, is established, the success of this leadership will be fulfilled today as it was before.

We have proven that Islam with its Îaqeedah and the system which emanates from it agrees with manâs nature. Consequently, Islam does not view man as a mechanical being functioning accurately like a machine and implementing the system without disparity on the basis of fine mathematical measures. On the contrary, from the Islamic perspective man is a social being applying the system with varying capabilities and qualities.

Thus, it is natural for Islam, on the one hand, to narrow the gap between people without making everyone equal while guaranteeing tranquillity for all. On the other hand, it is also natural that some individuals are found who deviate from the system and thus donât comply with it and others who do not respond or who turn away from the system. Inevitably, there will be in the society evildoers (fussaq), people who indulge in vices (fujjar), unbelievers (kuffar), hypocrites (munafiqeen), apostates (murtadun), and atheists (mulhidun). The important thing is that the society as a whole, from the point of view of its thoughts, sentiments, systems (rules and regulations) and people, is considered as an Islamic society which applies Islam when these elements manifest themselves as Islamic. The evidence for this is that it is impossible for anyone to apply a system at the level of Muhammadâs (saw) application. In spite of this, at his (saw)âs time there were disbelievers, hypocrites, apostates, atheists, evildoers and people who indulged in vices. Therefore, no one can claim that Islam was not applied completely or that the society was non-Islamic. Yet the Islamic application is on man as a social being, not a mechanical being.

Islam continued to be applied on the entire Islamic nation, Arabs and non-Arabs, from the time the Prophet (saw) settled down in Madinah till the colonial powers occupied the Islamic lands and replaced Islam with the Capitalist system. Islam was practically implemented from the first year of the hijrah until 1336 A.H (1918 AD) and the Islamic nation did not apply any other system than Islam throughout this period.

Although the Muslims translated books of philosophy, science, and different foreign cultures into Arabic, they never translated any legislation, system, or canon of other nations for research or its application. Considering Islam to be a system, some people applied it well and others misapplied it; this depended on whether they were observant or not in their comprehension of Islam or whether they were negligent in carrying its intellectual leadership. Consequently, the misapplication of Islam in some ages brought about decline in the Islamic society, but this is something which no system can avoid, because the application of the system depends on man. However, the mis-application does not mean that Islam was not implemented. Surely Islam was implemented and no other systems or ideology was applied.

The crucial point is in the enactment of canons and systems applied by the state. In this respect the state did not adopt any canon or system alien to Islam. What occurred was the misapplication of some of its rules by the rulers. However, notwithstanding this, one must observe two points when surveying the implementation of Islam throughout its history.

The first point is that history must not be taken from the enemies of Islam who harbour hatred towards it. Instead history must be taken from Muslims themselves after an extensive research so as not to adopt a distorted image. The second point is that the generalisation in study of the society should not be taken from the history of individuals or from one aspect of the society. For example, it would be wrong to judge the history of Ummayad era by studying the history of Yazidâs era. Or to judge the history of the Abbassid era from some incidents of their Khulafaâa.

Likewise, we must not judge the society of the Abbassid era from Kitab al-AâGhani (songs) which was written to narrate the stories of recklessly extravagant people, poets and authors and start thinking that the entire society was in a state of extravagance, sin, asceticism and isolation. Nor can we judge the Abbasid era from reading the books of mystics and conclude that the society was one asceticism.

Rather, we have to study the society comprehensively without any generalisation. We have to acknowledge that the history of the Islamic society as a society in any era was never written. What has been written is the affairs of the rulers and some officials. Those who wrote this history were not trustworthy, they were either slanderers or adulators and none of them deserves any credibility.

When the Islamic society is studied on this basis, i.e. to study it from all its sides comprehensively it can be found to be the best society. Since, it was so for the first, second and third centuries, in fact, right up to the middle of the twelfth century hijrah.

One finds that the society applied Islam throughout all its ages right up to the end of the Ottoman State as an Islamic state. Notwithstanding this, history should not be taken as the source for studying the system and fiqh. Additionally, the system should be taken from the sources of jurisprudence and not history, since history is not its source. Accordingly, when one wishes to understand the Communist system, one does not draw conclusions from the history of Russia, but from the books of the Communist ideology itself. Likewise, if one wishes to understand the books of English jurisprudence one should not take oneâs understanding from the history of England, but rather from the books of English jurisprudence. This applies to any system or canon. Islam is an ideology with its own Îaqeedah and system. Consequently, those who wish to understand it must not use its history as a source, neither for knowledge nor for deducing rules, i.e., ahkam.

The study of Islam is taken from the books of Islamic Fiqh, and the source for deducing its laws is its from its ShariÎah sources. Thus, history is not the correct source of the Islamic system, neither for its study nor as a ShariÎah source. It is therefore incorrect to take the history of ÎUmar bin al-Khattab or ÎUmar bin ÎAbdul-Aziz or Haroun al-Rasheed, whether from the historical events ascribed to them or from the books written during their respective periods, as a source for the ahkam ShariÎah. If an opinion of ÎUmar is followed in a question, it is followed in its capacity as a hukm ShariÎi deduced and applied by ÎUmar, as is the case with the hukm ShariÎi deduced by Abu Hanifah, ShafiÎi, JaÎfar and others. It is not adopted as an historical event. History, accordingly, has nothing to do with adopting or knowing the system or with ascertaining whether or not the system was applied. Fiqh, rat