Political Power

I sometimes read your websites for understanding, yet I afraid I cannot help to say that your associate answers on certain caliph issues after Hadrat Ali (ra) is quite contrary to the history lessons I read in the famous books. My questions follow: Does power when assumed by someone itself is the criteria of right or wrong? Does power of Ommayyeds and the founder of the dynasty necessarily curtails the man who is brought up in prophetic traditions, from childhood, even without giving him any divinely inspired role? Is Islam nothing but an extension of political power and without it, it is simply collapsed, as a non-entity? Does anyone who grasps power is now the ultimate source of inspiration as ulul amr, ideally with consultation, practically without just like communist leaders of bygone days of soviet union?

Read More

The Rashidoon Caliphs

My question is why there are only four khalifas and not a fifth one? Furthermore I would like to ask how I can best explain to an Ahmadi about the true religion.

Read More

Women’s Role In Political Affairs In Early Islam

During the selection of the Rashidoon Caliphs, were the wives of the Prophet (sws) consulted or not? If not, than why women demand the right to vote in an Islamic country?

There is a verse in the Qur'an regarding the Companions of the prophet (sws) that reads: "they are gentle amongst themselves but harsh towards the enemies". But the history says that the Companions have been fighting amongst themselves i.e. Hazrat Ali (rta) and Hazrat Mu'awiya (rta). Since the Qur'an can never be wrong there must be a problem with the history.
Read More

Khelafat After The Prophet (sws)

It is obvious that the issue of Khelafat was always a difficult issue in the history of Islam and one that affects Islam a lot:

  •  Immediately after the passing away of the Holy Prophet there were arguments and disagreements between some of the Sahabeh. The recording of history is controversy but as a whole it appears that it wasn't like every one was happy (at first at the beginning) with the Khelafat of Abu Bakr. Ansar wanted their own rep. Ali and Zubayr were not happy (as recorded in Bukhari), etc.
  •  The same problem was there between Moawiah and Hassan.
  •  Same between Yazid and Hussain.
  •  Same through out the history of Khelafat among Bani Omayyeh and Bani Abbas.
  •  Khalafat became like king-prince system and was corrupted.
  •  Finally Muslims lost their system of Khelafat.
Question is:
As we can see most of the problems that Muslims face these days are because of the lack of a system of Khelafat. As such it is difficult to agree that khelafat is only a political matter and not a religious one.
The Holy Prophet used to advise Muslims about what ever he thought they will need in future.
How come the Prophet was absolutely silent about the issue of Khelafat?
If not clearly appointing a person, at least why he did not advised Muslims about the system of assigning a Khalifh?
Some thing like:
"After me, do such and such and consider such and such and use this or that procedure to appoint a Khalifah"
Being the last Prophet whose nation supposed to be the strongest nation till the end of the world, isn't this (lack of direction about Khelfat) weird?
Every leader's concern near his dead is about the leadership system in his nation. We can see many examples in the history where successful leaders always established a system of leadership before their passing away.

Why the Holy Prophet (SWS) was an exception?

Read More