Unscripted #26 | Caliphate, Democracy and Brexit with Sh Haitham

[@aadilkader]

For the people criticizing his final statement "wherever there's democracy there's hope", did you not listen to the rest of the hour he was speaking? His whole point was that we can get closer to Shariah through democracy until we can eventually establish a true Khilafah

[@Yes-bt1ig]

Alhamdulillah Sheikh Haitham looks very healty

[@rambutan_lychee9255]

Unfortunately early this year he revealed that he was diagnosed with cancer

[@zia-ulislam7761]

Fascinating podcast. May Allah reward all of you for efforts. Ps, good advert at the start Baws.

[@irfanbaig6792]

MashaAllaah, the intellelect sheikh Haitham is. A modern world real Islamic thinker we need. May Allaah increase his life so we benefit from his wisdom. Ahmad MashaAllaah

[@aroncopeland7542]

Define modern lol time is an illusion it doesn't exist. This is a scientific fact

[@gajiburrahman7378]

Bismillah I don't understand why people are getting so upset about Sheikh Haitham's claim of a "democratic" caliphate. When Sheikh Haitham says democracy, he obviously does not mean the Western style secular democracy. He simply means that Muslims can choose their own leader, that's it. Some people in the comments section are saying that it is haram to have an election every 4 or 5 years to choose a caliph. But as far as I know, there is nothing in the Quran or Sunnah which forbids having elections every 4 or 5 years. I personally think there is no need to have an election every 4 or 5 years. I think we can stick to the traditional Muslim model where the caliph rules until he dies, or is removed for some wrongdoing or insanity etc. But I don't believe that it is haram to elect someone every 4 or 5 years.

[@gajiburrahman7378]

@Don't Support Pakistan Because Nationalism is Haram Salaam alaikum. I don't see why we would need to make the caliph purely symbolic and ceremonial. If we ever have a caliph again, we might as well make him a real caliph and give him real powers. Just because he has full authority does not mean he will do everything by himself, obviously he will appoint subordinates to do other jobs for him. The whole point of having one main leader is that you won't get a situation where a country is unable to move forward because of indecision. The main leader is the guy who puts his foot down and says "this is the course of action we will take and that's it!"

[@abdullahassaffah]

Democracy is democracy your statement is equivalent to aaying he isn't referring to evil racism but good racism racist is racist democracy is democracy they're both evil one is kufr other major sin but both are evil Whats this rubbish it is wajib to support him he sounds like madkhali version of erdogan same as madkhalis extreme following of Saud even when they do evil did sheikh haitham ever speak against erdogan on uighir betrayal alliance with Israel wanting to get inside nato answer is no same as madkhalis who support mbs whether he allows alliance with Shia israel betraying the ummah both the erdogan camps and madkhali camps are extreme blind followers of their leader that's all it is

[@DawahMotivation]

I loved the way how shk Haitham was being so difficult! Love it!

[@MissionIslamTV]

wow...ma sha allah...learnt alot

[@forallah5798]

Greetings of peace, Quran 6, 116 Should you obey the majority of those on earth, they would lead you astray from Allah's way. They follow nothing but mere surmise and they do nothing but make conjectures. Hence their for majority rule democracy on earth is clearly haram, it leads away from Allah's way. Just think about it, would you hire a leader for your company my majority rule or would you hire a leader based on their capacity for that position. Quran 21, 105 My servants with the right capacity shall inherit the land. Democracy majority rule is obviously injustice and not Islamic. The Khalifa is selected by a consensus of righteous believers ( willingly or unwillingly ), not an election ( popularity contest ).

[@MoosaIslamic]

You have misunderstood the Shaykh's argument about khilafah being akin to a constitutional monarchy

[@osmanjibril8940]

akhi this guy is finished i dont think he has read the quran and if he did he hasnt comtemplated on it, theres many verses of the quran where it commands the muslims to rule with the shariah and he says in the beginning of the video whenever theres democracy i think theres hope. so the opposite is whenever theres shariah theres no hope.

[@forallah5798]

@@osmanjibril8940 indeed brother, I find it strange, hearing so called knowledgable Muslims say democracy is good. Peace

[@forallah5798]

@@MoosaIslamic I agree with alot of what the guest speaker had mentioned but democracy is flawed to the core and Quran 6, 116 supports my position, peace brother.

[@Sam-ng3of]

@@forallah5798 that ayah does not support any position in this debate whatsoever. Read its tafsir and what its referring to lol.

[@muhammadsaifuddin8378]

0.05 'Wherever their is democracy‚ their is hope.' In other words‚ wherever their is a Kufr system‚ you think their is hope. Allahul musta'aan.

[@aadilkader]

Don't take a single sentence from an hour long episode and condemn the speaker. That's clearly not what he was saying

[@ibnqaysr7938]

This is what happens when the hukm shari is not your criteria and you don't understand the waqi; you start evaluating the pros of cons in a premise where you don't belong. Equating elections with a democracy is a false equivalence and betrays an absurd lack of political clarity about concepts such as sovereignty, which belongs to the people, that allows them to legislate when it only belonged to Allah. Asking in rhetoric if the sharia can be restored due to the vacuum of those institutions that enable it under the guise of it being long-term and tacitly impossible is equally absurd and betrays any basic understanding of political transformation and indeed radical change. May Allah reward the sheikh for a number of things he mentions in this podcast, re khurooj and calling out those scholars that order not to go against the ruler - but I am afraid the basis of his argumentation, even though the conclusion is right, is also slightly flawed, because he argues that it is what the people want it, when it was the order of Allah - for if the people desired a tyrant in power or kufr in place, it would not make it right. Woe to those that use the waqi3 as a basis for their tafkeer, I am afraid these people will never create change, because they passively conform to the overwhelming reality that pervades them without a desire nor vision to change it. Woe to those who tacitly imply that the dead and suffering who were killed and butchered by tyrants like sisi, are foolish - the sheikh failed to even grasp the meaning of the ayat he is referencing. Woe to those who called the dog Erdogan who rules by other than what Allah has revealed, who sold the Muslims in Syria in his agreement with Russia and obedience to the United States, a MUJADDID. Woe to those who believe a ruler is fulfilling his obligation in implementing secularism, apparently absolved if he is doing as best he can. Woe to those who equate ruling by the sharia with boring overused stereotypes to undermine the youth, who forgets the ayat in Baqarah about accepting part of the book and rejecting the rest.

[@I.iiiiiiii-x7u]

These unscripted podcasts are very problematic, raising many questions regarding the legitimacy of these ‘people of knowledge’

[@Sam-ng3of]

Woe, woe, woe, speak English properly and stop thinking you're Shakespear.

[@kaz4845]

What is ruling according to the sharia? Why don't you people give details

[@Munty2011]

Great point made about protests being enshrined in many constitutions that many rulers have signed up to. So the Muslim ruler accepts the right of the people to protest, but the scholar deems it haram because it goes against the Ruler who actually allows. The irony is almost comedic.

[@ThatsWasupFool]

The scholar may also deem haram other dynamics that the ruler has allowed I.e intoxicants, gambling, usury etc Where is the comedy in that?

[@peetaahzak1431]

@@ThatsWasupFool Thought of the same thing, his comment is actually comedic

[@maiwandkhan5688]

May Allah bless you sheikh haytham al haddad

[@1490ahmed]

The "shaikh" says "comparing islamic system to dictatorship is insult to islam". How come he does not see a problem in creating equivalence of islamic system to democracy??? Democracy is even worse as Allamah Iqbal identified. In dictatorship, there is one taghut who takes the right of Allah and people who submit to him willingly are awaliyaa taghut. Democracy as Allamah iqbal said, made everyone .. even common man God i.e. taghut .. because in democracy.. even common people legislate!

[@muhtasimmahin5057]

"When there is democracy, there is hope."- I'm not a Sheikh but there is something wrong in that line. May Allah guide him.

[@abdullahassaffah]

Sheikh haitham AL Haddad has some dodgy views

[@Sheriff1418]

What is alternative then?

[@faysalahmed9157]

Ma sha Allah, Shaykh looks good and healthy. May Allah keep him in good health. Ameen Some good points made.

[@ebubekirozkan169]

love sheikh haddad, love from Turkey

[@kaz4845]

Don't always agree with the sheikh but he is knowledgeable mashaallah..

[@osmanjibril8940]

akhi what benefits does it bring if you have knowledge of the quran and sunnah and you dont act upon or even believe in it, for example he said whenever theres democracy theres hope. how can someone like that be knowledgeable of the religion even the common muslims know we should believe in the shariah and he should have said whenever theres shariah theres hope.

[@kaz4845]

@@osmanjibril8940, enlighten us on how the shariah instructs us to be ruled? How are leaders chosen, removed? What are the responsibilities of the ruler and if he fails or breaks those what should happen?

[@islammuzahidul6524]

@@osmanjibril8940 madkhali bootlicker detected.

[@osmanjibril8940]

@@islammuzahidul6524 so the one who believes in the verse و من لم يحكم بما أنزل الله فأولئك هم الكافرون is a madkhali bootliker but how about the one who has sent down this verse is he a madkhali booliker.

[@osmanjibril8940]

@@islammuzahidul6524 this is where fanaticism towards people takes you reject allah's command to rule with the shariah and choose democracy becoz your shaikh said so. and you will go so far to call allah and his slaves bootlikers. subhanallah

[@Abdullah12794]

Plz have more podcasts with sheikh Haitham PLZZZZZ. Barakallahu feekum

[@sb-fz1kl]

I feel like this podcast lacked depth.

[@Sam-ng3of]

Perhaps bc the topic/questions kept changing from one to another so quickly. Shaykh still provided great nuance and insight.

[@holdshiftt2run308]

Because you have an ikhwani and two ignorant people blindly following him.

[@holdshiftt2run308]

@Nina Aden Dictatorships aren’t inherently a bad thing, but civil war is. People like you who want war and fitnah are usually takfiris or modernists. But according to you, anyone who doesn’t want fitnah is a bootlicker. Who's boot are you licking? Is it daesh? Is it the west?

[@holdshiftt2run308]

@Nina Aden Okay, so you are a layperson who parrots words without knowing what they mean. Us "wahhabis" reject the takfiri methodology. The prophet forbade rebelling against a Muslim ruler. Dictatorships are NOT haram as Islam is not a democratic system. Islam. The Islamic Khilafah was a form of dictatorship as it was not a democratic system. It did not go off a "majority rules" format. Not to mention, the legislation is constant unlike in a democracy where the source of law can change. KSA has mostly Islamic laws, not to mention they have done a lot for the Muslims. What have you done?

[@sunni370]

Democratic Khalifah, what world are u people living in.

[@osmanjibril8940]

ikhwaani lala land

[@sunni370]

Lol

[@sunni370]

Democratic Khalifah is an complete oxymoron 🤣

[@osmanjibril8940]

@@sunni370lool and lots of muslims are fantacising about democracy madness

[@kaz4845]

@@osmanjibril8940, what's your solution? What is the ruling system you believe in? How are rulers chosen

[@abdulwarisbinayyubbinimams8685]

Please make podcast with USTADH ALI HAMMUDA

[@holdshiftt2run308]

"Wherever there is democracy, I think there is hope." That quote should be enough to determine what kind of aqeedah he has.

[@miqsirajuddin5378]

Can you expound further?

[@osmanjibril8940]

puuuuuuure misguidance caller at the gates of the hellfire

[@holdshiftt2run308]

@@osmanjibril8940 Yeah, he just keeps digging his hole deeper.

[@holdshiftt2run308]

@@miqsirajuddin5378 He thinks that hope lies in democracy while in reality our hope lies in the hukm of Allah. However, he thinks KSA should get rid of their system which is doing good for the people abd is very close to Islam into a secular socialist democracy. This is the type of system people like Haitham Al-Haddad want. He wants to imitate the west.

[@Cheguevara2.0]

Be it ummayad or saudi kings, not rocking the boat is only because they would unseat themselves.

[@reXdbz]

The Messenger of Allah (salallaahu alaihi wassallam) made it explicitly clear that it is forbidden to speak openly against the Muslim ruler, but rather to advise him in private, regardless of his tyranny: “Whosoever wishes to advise the Ruler, let him not do so openly. Rather he should take him by his hand and take him into seclusion [and advise him]. So if he accepts that from him, then it is in his favour, and if he does not accept, then at least he fulfilled his duty.” [Authentically reported by Imam Ahmad in al-Musnad, no. 15359, as-Sunnah, no. 1097] To advise the oppressive ruler directly to his face (not publicly as clarified from the above hadith) is considered in Islam to be from the best forms of Jihād. It is reported that the Messenger of Allāh (salallaahu alaihi wassallam) said: “The most superior form of Jihad is to say a word of truth in the face of an oppressive ruler.” -------------------- If one is not able to advise the rulers due to ignorance or inability, then he does not openly rebuke the rulers, as Allāh’s Messenger (salallaahu ‘alaihi wassallam) has forbidden that - upon him in this situation is to supplicate for the guidance of the Muslim rulers as agreed upon by the early scholars. The Creed of Imām al-Bukhārī, p.40. The great Imam al-Barbahari (died 329H, rahimhaullaah) stated the position and consensus of the Muslims towards their rulers: “If you find a man making supplication against the ruler, know that he is a person of innovation (deviation). If you find a person making supplication for the ruler to be upright, know that he is a person of the Sunnah, if Allah wills. We are ordered to make supplication for them (i.e. the rulers) to be upright. We have not been ordered to make supplication against them, even if they commit tyranny and oppression, since their tyranny and oppression reflect only upon themselves but their rectitude is good for themselves and the Muslims.” [Sharhus-Sunnah of al-Barbahari.] -------------------- The great scholar Ibn Baz (died 1420AH) was asked, “Is it from the methodology of the Salaf [Sahaba, Tabieen, Tabi Tabieen] to criticize the rulers from the pulpits? And what is the methodology of the Salaf in advising the rulers?” So he answered: “It is not from the methodology of the Salaf to criticize the rulers from the pulpits, because that would incite chaos, and it would involve not listening and obeying in that which is good. And this would mean becoming engrossed in that which harms and does not benefit. However, the way of advising that the Salaf followed was to write to the ruler, or to convey the advice to the Scholars who would then convey it to him, until he has been directed towards good. So opposing the evil can be done without mentioning the doer. So adultery, intoxicants and interest can be opposed without mentioning the one who is involved in them. And it is enough of an opposition to sins that they be warned against without mentioning that so and so is involved in them, whether it is the ruler, or other than the ruler. And when the fitnah (trial, discord) occurred in the time of ʿUthman [RadiAllahu Anhu] , some people said to Usamah bin Zayd , ‘Will you not speak to ʿUthman?’ So he said, ‘Do you think that I have not spoken to him, just because you have not heard it from me? Verily I will speak to him concerning what is between him and me, without opening an affair which I would not like to be the first to open.’ [ An authentic narration: Related by Ahmad (3/403) and Ibn Abī ʿĀsim (2/521).] So when they (the Kharijites) opened it, evil took place in the time of ʿUthman [RadiAllahu Anhu]. They opposed ʿUthman [RadiAllahu Anhu] openly, thus completing the tribulations, fighting and corruption, which has not ceased to affect the people to this day, was brought about. And this caused the tribulation to occur between ʿAlī and Muʿawiyah [RadiAllahu Anhuma], and ʿUthman [RadiAllahu Anhu] was killed for these reasons… Furthermore, a large number of Companions and others besides them were killed due to this open rebellion and the open proclamation of the faults of the ruler, until the people began to hate the one charged with authority over them and killed him. We ask Allah for success.” [Refer to Al-Maʿloom min Wajibil-’Ilaqah baynal-Hakim wal-Mahkoom, pp. 22-33.] -------------------------------- Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (died 241H) was beaten and jailed by four consecutive kings. Despite that, he viewed revolt to be unlawful against those who violated the Islamic belief and punished him for not agreeing with them. Hanbal bin Ishaq said: “During the rule of Wathiq, the jurists of Baghdad gathered in front of Ahmad bin Hanbal. They included Abu Bakr bin ʿUbaid, Ibrahim bin ʿAli al-Matbakhi and Fadl bin ʿAsim. So they came to Ahmad bin Hanbal so I gave them permission. They said to him, ‘This affair (i.e. the inquisition) has become aggravated and elevated.’ They were referring to the ruler making manifest the issue of the Qurān being created and other than that. So Ahmad bin Hanbal said to them, ‘So what is it that you want?’ They said: ‘We want you to join us in saying that we are not pleased with his rule and leadership.’ So Ahmad bin Hanbal debated with them for an hour and he said to them: ‘Keep opposing [the false belief itself] with your statements but do not remove your hands from obedience and do not encourage the Muslims to rebel and do not spill your blood and the blood of the Muslims along with you. Look to the results of your actions. And remain patient until you are content with a righteous or sinful rule.’” [Mihnatul-Imam Ahmad (p. 70-72); al-Khallal in as-Sunnah (no. 90) with an authentic chain of narration.] -------------------------------- Hasan al-Basri (died 110H) was a great scholar of the first Islamic century and there is no dispute regarding his credentials and immense knowledge. Ibn Saʿd relates: “A group of Muslims came to al-Hasan al-Basri seeking a verdict to rebel against al-Hajjaj [13] (a tyrannical and despotic general). So they said, “O Abu Saʿid! What do you say about fighting this oppressor who has unlawfully spilt blood and unlawfully taken wealth and has done this and done that?” So al-Hasan said, “I hold that he should not be fought. If this is a punishment from Allāh, then you will not be able to remove it with your swords. If this is a trial from Allāh, then be patient until Allah’s judgement comes, and He is the best of judges.” So they left al-Hasan, disagreed with him and rebelled against al-Hajjaj - so al-Hajjaj killed them all. Al-Hasan used to say, “If the people had patience when they are being tested by their unjust ruler, it will not be long before Allah will give them a way out. However, they always rush for their swords, so they are left with their swords. By Allah! Not even for a single day did they bring about any good.” [Tabaqat al-Kubra (7/163-165)] After reading the words of the noble Prophet and the commentaries of the righteous scholars, one naturally comes to the conclusion that rebellions, assassinations and coup d’etats are all against the teachings of Islam.

[@ArchiveofTawheed]

Can you really believe a Muslim would ever say "Whenever there is democracy there is hope"? OH "Whenever there is SHIRK I think there is hope" - and he calls himself sheikh..

[@Abdullah12794]

I really like the comedy Q and A 😄 may Allah bless you all, ameen

[@saleemakbar4335]

Democracy is a system of ruling not to be confused with elections which the Sheikh has done, however good point that the Sheikh recognised that there must have been a system in place .

[@sunni370]

Democracy is a system of ruling which does not recognise Allah سبحانه وتعالى as the lawmaker. And elections are the means of supporting the kufr system and kufr laws and the oppressive and corrupt rulers.

[@saleemakbar4335]

@@sunni370 Even communists selected or elected their leaders, so selection , election can be a feature of any system .The issue is the Sheikh adding the term democracy at any opportunity . It is a sad state of affairs when we forget what is going on the muslim world interms of the Greater Middle East Initiative where yet again the colonisers are slicing up and imposing their system on the Middle East . His last statement was just laughable " where there is democracy there is hope " Remember Algeria When the people used democracy to vote in Islam in 1992, a military coup dismantled the winning party and led to bloodshed . Democracy like any other system will never allow itself to be voted out for a alternative system . Let us have the understanding and the confidence to break free from the colonisers shackles that bind our thinking.

[@sunni370]

Democratic elections cannot be separated from democracy. Elections in and of itself is not haraam, for example having an election within the masjid (amongst the committee) to see who's going to become the head committee leader. This is completely different to voting in democratic system, communist system, which are systems that recognise a lawmaker other than our true creator and our true al hakam (judge).

[@sunni370]

@@saleemakbar4335 i agree, with your point that he's adding the term democracy to many scenarios. When the sahabas agreed on abu Bakr. It wasn't democracy, nor was it a general election. The sahabas such as the ahl ale wal Aqd (the people of power and authority), got together and agree on abu bakr. Democracy is a system that believes that the law is made by the people for the people. So when a country such Algeria or Egypt or Turkey give the lip service and claim that they want to implement shariah through democracy, its cannot work because the foundation (democracy) is a system that believes they can decide on laws. When Allah سبحانه وتعالى has made a decision, nobody has a right to decide or vote on a law from the shariah.

[@blobbins17]

Group (population) selection/voting/democracy is not a sunna of any prophet. And im not talking about the appointing of Prophets and messengers only, im talking ANY leader/king even if not a prophet has to be selected by God. This is tbe sunna of the Quran and prophets. Point blank

[@blobbins17]

mo ali Your English is sub-par, but what I assume your eluding to is not what I said. Leaders are appointed by God

[@ahmedw5]

I was hoping to hear some Quran and some Sunnah. There were only a few mentions of implicit nature? The way to convince a good muslim is to show him that this view is supported by the Quran and Sunnah. I didn't see a single evidence from Quran and sunnah for rebelling against a *muslim* (establishes salah) leader, other than the argument of "enjoining good and forbidding evil". The way to enjoin good and forbid evil against a ruler is to speak to him, not rebel, like we learn from the hadith of Abu Said al Khudri: It was narrated that Abu Sa’eed said: “Marwan brought the pulpit out one ‘Eid day and started to deliver the sermon before the prayer. A man stood up and said: ‘O Commander of the Believers, you have gone against the Sunnah. You have brought the pulpit out on the day of ‘Eid and it was not brought out before, and you started with the sermon before the prayer, when this was not done before.’ Abu Sa’eed said: ‘As for this man, he has done his duty. I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: “Whoever among you sees an evil action, and he is able to change it with his hand, then change it with his hand (by taking action); if he cannot, (do so) with his tongue then with his tongue (by speaking out); and if he cannot then with his heart (by hating it and feeling that it is wrong), and that is the weakest of faith.” [Sunan Ibn Majah] We don't enjoin good and forbid evil in our own ways, we do it in accordance to the Prophets sunnah. The prophet told us to never rebel against a ruler, even if he is bad, so long as he establishes the salah: Awf ibn Malik reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: The best of your rulers are those whom you love and they love you, who pray for you and you pray for them. The worst of your rulers are those whom you hate and they hate you, whom you curse and they curse you. It was said, “Shall we confront them with swords?” The Prophet said: No, as long as they establish prayer among you. If you find something hateful from them, you should hate their actions but not withdraw your hand from obedience. Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1855, Grade: Sahih Shaykh Haitham as a 100 times more knowledge than me, and he knows these ahadith, and still doesn't mention them? Very disappointing.

[@osmanjibril8940]

akhi of course he isnt going to mention these verses and ahaadeeth coz they go against his desires. he is ikhwaani deviant and they believe that theres hope in democracy and no hope in shariah. akhi cant you see clearly that deviant scholars do exist and dont let the he has lot of knowledge deceive you. allah said إنما يخشى من عباده العلماء only the scholars from his servant truly fear allah. do you think this ayat applys to someone who goes against the fundementals of the religion such as ruling upon the shariah and reblling against muslim even if they are corrupt.

[@symbiotezilla12345]

@@osmanjibril8940 You do realize that "democracy" in and of itself is not deviance or shirk right? Endorsing a system of rule *other* than Allah is shirk altogether. Even the sahaba and kalifa tu Rashidoon themselves *voted* on the candidate that was best to rule with the exception of Umar (r.a) who was chosen directly by Abu Bakr (r.a) himself. This is the exact situation mentioned by the sheikh. As we all know, the sahaba ALWAYS kept a "shuraa" or "council" to advise them in matters and affairs, and this is a form of *democracy* . So if you had a muslim country that has a parliament system with a prime minister or president, as long as they rule and judge by the laws od Allah, that system is *valid* Now unless you heard the sheikh explicitly endorse and favor a system *over and instead* of the shariah of Allah (in an actual muslim country), then you have uttered a slander....

[@osmanjibril8940]

@@symbiotezilla12345 akhi who are you trying fool? the scholars have explained in details how democracy opposes islam in many ways. Firstly: Democracy is not an Arabic word. Rather it is derived from the Greek, and it is a composite of two words: demos, meaning the masses or the people, and kratia, meaning rule. So what is meant is the rule of the masses or the rule of the people. Secondly: Democracy is a system that is contrary to Islam, because it gives the power of legislation to the people or to those who represent them (such as members of Parliament). Based on that, in democracy legislative authority is given to someone other than Allah, may He be exalted; rather it is given to the people and their deputies, and what matters is not their consensus but the majority. Thus what the majority agree upon becomes laws that are binding on the nation, even if it is contrary to common sense, religious teaching or reason. In these systems legislation has been promulgated allowing abortion, same-sex marriage and usurious interest (riba); the rulings of sharee‘ah have been abolished; and fornication/adultery and the drinking of alcohol are permitted. In fact this system is at war with Islam and its followers. Allah, may He be exalted, has told us in the His Book that legislative authority belongs to Him alone, and that He is the wisest of those who issue rulings and judge. He has forbidden the association of anyone with Him in His authority, and no one is better than Him in ruling. Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “So the judgement is only with Allah, the Most High, the Most Great!” [Ghaafir 40:12] “The command (or the judgement) is for none but Allah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him (i.e. His Monotheism), that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not” [Yoosuf 12:40] “Is not Allah the Best of judges?” [at-Teen 95:8] “Say: ‘Allah knows best how long they stayed. With Him is (the knowledge of) the unseen of the heavens and the earth. How clearly He sees, and hears (everything)! They have no Walee (Helper, Disposer of affairs, Protector, etc.) other than Him, and He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule’” [al-Kahf 18:26] “Do they then seek the judgement of (the Days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allah for a people who have firm Faith?” [al-Maa’idah 5:50]. Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, is the Creator of all things and He knows what is good for them and what is in their best interests of rulings. Human beings vary in intellect, attitude and customs, and they are unaware of what is best for them, let alone what is best for others. Hence in societies that are ruled by the people in terms of legislation and laws, one sees only corruption, immorality and disintegration of the social fabric. It should be noted that in many countries this system has changed into something that has no reality behind it, and it is mere slogans by which people are deceived; in fact the real ruler is the head of state and his helpers, and the people are suppressed and have no say in anything. There is nothing more indicative of that than the fact that when this democracy produces results that do not suit the desires of the rulers, they crush it underfoot. Cases of election fraud, suppression of freedoms and silencing of the voices of those who speak the truth are well known to everyone and do not need further proof. This is very clear in many countries and does not need any proof. It says in Mawsoo‘ah al-Adyaan wa’l-Madhaahib al-Mu‘aasirah (2/1066):

[@osmanjibril8940]

@@symbiotezilla12345 Representative democracy: This is one of the democratic systems in which the people exercise authority through a council of elected representatives of the people. In this system the people retain the right to exercise some aspects of authority directly by various means, the most important of which are: 1. The right to propose laws, which is done when a number of people propse a law in general terms or in detail, which the parliament will then discuss and vote upon. 2. The right to a referendum, whereby a law that has already been approved by Parliament is presented to the people so that they can have their say. 3. The right of objection, whereby a number of voters defined by the Constitution have the right to object to a law within a certain period after it has been passed, which will result in taking the matter to the people for a general referendum; if the people agree with it, it will be promulgated, otherwise it will be annulled. This is included in most modern constitutions. Undoubtedly democratic systems are one of the modern forms of shirk, in terms of obedience and submission, or in legislation, as it disregards the authority of the Creator, may He be glorified and exalted, and His absolute right of legislation, and regards that as one of the rights of created beings. But Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “You do not worship besides Him but only names which you have named (forged), you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority. The command (or the judgement) is for none but Allah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him (i.e. His Monotheism), that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not.” [Yoosuf 12:40] “Say (O Muhammad SAW): "I am on clear proof from my Lord (Islamic Monotheism), but you deny (the truth that has come to me from Allah). I have not gotten what you are asking for impatiently (the torment). The decision is only for Allah, He declares the truth, and He is the Best of judges.” [al-An ‘aam 6:57].

[@osmanjibril8940]

@@symbiotezilla12345 Some people think that the word democracy is equivalent to shoora (consultation) in Islam! This is a mistaken notion for many reasons, including the following: 1. Shoora has to do with new matters that arise or with matters that are not explained in detail in the texts of the Qur’an or Sunnah. With regard to the “rule of the people”, the people may discuss what is well-established in religion, which may lead to refusing to acknowldge the prohibitions on that which is forbidden, and to forbidding that which Allah has permitted or made obligatory. So the sale of alcohol is permitted according to these laws, as are fornication/adultery and riba (usury), but these laws put pressures on Islamic organizations and the activities of those who call people to Allah. This is diametrically opposed to sharee‘ah, so what does this have to do with shoora? 2. The majlis ash-shoora (consultative committee) is to be formed of people who have a deep knowledge of fiqh, Islam and sharee‘ah, fahm, and have a high level of piety and good character. So no one who is of bad character or foolish, or is a disbeliever or atheist, is to be consulted or involved in the shoora process. As for the democratic councils of representatives, they pay no attention to any of the con ditions mentioned above. The representative may be a disbeliever, or of bad character or foolish. What does this have to do with shoora as prescribed in Islam? 3. Shoora is not binding upon the ruler; the ruler may give precedence to the view of one member of the council that is supported by proof, and prefer his view over that of the other council members, whereas in the case of representative democracy, the agreement of the majority becomes legally binding upon the people. Once this is known, then what the Muslims must do is be proud of their religion and trust that the rulings of the Lord are best for them in this world and in the Hereafter, and they should disavow systems that go against the laws of Allah. What all other Muslims must do - rulers and ruled alike - is adhere to the laws of Allah, may He be exalted, in all their affairs. It is not permissible for anyone to follow a system or methodology other than Islam. One of the indications of their acceptance of Allah as their Lord, Islam as their religion, and Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) as their Prophet and Messenger, is that the Muslims adhere to Islam outwardly and inwardly; they respect the laws of Allah and follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).

[@ahmadumar6210]

i'm suprised the shaykh here doesnt argument by islamic text instead with historical critical method like the orientalists, how he ends like them?

[@osmanjibril8940]

quran and sunnah opposes his devuant ikhwaani methodology so he is very smart to avoid islamic text. all his evidences are opinions and desires.may allah protect us from innovations and innovators. ameen

[@ahmadumar6210]

@@osmanjibril8940 amin dear brother

[@1490ahmed]

@@osmanjibril8940 Ahmad was spot on, but what are you capitalizing from it.. madkhalism?

[@osmanjibril8940]

@@1490ahmed who said anything about madkhalism. i think you have a problem of loving innovations thats why you name someone madkhali just like the people who are sufi they call people of tawheed wahabi. may allah guide you from following your desires and innovators.

[@AbuMoosaa]

Anyone with ilm will know what angle he is coming from and what Manhaj he is promoting

[@osmanjibril8940]

why are you so shy to say it, IKHWAAAAAANISM

[@justincaseOne]

foolish ! If the system same *What does it matter who is ruling with it ?*

[@watermelon7867]

السلام عليكم هل نستطيع أن نستطمع إلى هذه المدونة الصوطية خلال Itunes?

[@drsalmanbutt]

Yousuf Ali podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/unscripted-podcast-islam21c-media/id1473951152

[@ajdsjfihiorho]

Absolute rubbish, no understanding of sharia, how can you equate democracy to sharia?? Ikhwanism and secularism all together, this is why these people have been warned from, take knowledge from people of suunnah, not ikhwani secularists

[@markward3981]

🤔 The shaykh has some good points , though I don't agree with him on everything.

[@reXdbz]

46:31 true muslims following islam is the priority. so if you know and understand that then why are Ikhwanis after political power and are against teaching correct Islam to the Muslims by rectifying their Aqeedah and Manhaj ? this Uncle also spoke about 'enjoining good and forbidding evil' in a political sense even though it causes chaos, bloodshed and disunity. but then his ikhwani sect does not believe in 'enjoining good and forbidding evil' when it comes to warning Muslims against Shirk and Bid'ah for the sake of their imaginary unity which they clearly don't care about since they cause chaos and bloodshed in Muslim countries. so he is highly contradicting himself. and as everyone has noticed, he didn't use evidence from Quran and Sunnah to back up his claims. but yea he think all the Top Scholars are 'Wrong'. ok Mr 'i know it all'

[@Lantumo]

53:40 shaykh, I dont think this is a good comparison. We cannot compare ruling with dead meat and praying..

[@HDKidt]

His beard looks very thick Allahumma baarik - is this recenf

[@Abdullah12794]

Mohamed Rahim yes it is, May Allah grant the sheikh good health and long life, ameen

[@I.iiiiiiii-x7u]

Dawahman, DUS dawah, etc. clarify these strange discussion for us, barakAllahu feek

[@Sam-ng3of]

Lol, I hope this was a trolling joke bc those guys have no qualifications to speak whatsoever.

[@Abu_Abdullah790]

I’m not going to watch these people but based on the title, this might be the most ridiculous thing I’ve seen in the Ummah ever

[@nadia.f_0019]

Will there ever be a female guest for the podcast ? Inshallah I support your initiative and topics mashallah

[@binttufail]

ilmfeed do female host and guest podcasts and they're excellent. Just type ilmfeed podcasts on search engine

[@nadia.f_0019]

@Sam Harris sure thank you for your input, inshallah my kitchen will be designed to feel more cose to cook and bake delights for future guests. A home without a kitchen is an issue

[@nadia.f_0019]

@Sam Harris thank you for your message and inshallah Allah guide us humans to a path of sincere beauty.

[@feey0x]

If the khilafah is a supreme leadership role that is separate from the highest scholarly leadership, it would have been interesting to discuss whether women are allowed to be Khalifas. This was something that was raised at Speakers Corner and no one could give a sufficient answer.

[@feey0x]

@Don't Support Pakistan Because Nationalism is Haram that doesn't explain the islamic reasoning behind women not being allowed to become Calipha. Take feminism out of it. It's a normal question. To say this is the case because in a REAL Islamic country it is not allowed is not a argument.

[@feey0x]

@Don't Support Pakistan Because Nationalism is Haram I have no issue accepting that the Caliph is an identical role to being a president. Though I disagree with the viability of a single leader for the Muslim Ummah when there are endless disagreements within islamic theological discourse. The caliph will somewhat have to share the islamic theological stance of the people he or she is representing. Secondly, the video discussion already made clear that this is a political leadership role not a religious one. As they said the structure in a Muslim country would be like a constitutional monarchy. My question is: on that basis what prevents a woman from taking that leadership role?

[@feey0x]

@Don't Support Pakistan Because Nationalism is Haram that's really useful information, a lot of which I've come across for the first time. What about if one or more of the six candidates was a woman/were women? Just because historically there wasn't a female caliph doesn't mean there shouldn't be one now or in the future. I still don't understand the reasoning behind it. I'm just trying to make sense of our stance in Islam regarding female leadership. What is the issue when it comes to a women becoming the leader? If the culture and society is open and accepting of a female leader, what prevents that society from nominating a good female candidate who has experience, skill and knowledge? I'm willing to accept non-female leadership but it requires theological backing.

[@RaNdOm-el9ji]

There’s a lot of hypocrisy in the chat! People Living under democracy , while saying how wonderful it would be living under the talban and isis. Lol

[@reXdbz]

Cringe... over 9000 !

[@ibrahimahmed136]

Ahmed did grett

[@maymunasavant1687]

Are you for real ?????you unbelievable

[@peeknaaarm1339]

Presenter in the middle please allow the dead jokes and stick to the kayr jazakallah

[@sb-fz1kl]

Nah I love Salmaans light heartedness . He is probably the smartet person in that room and he never crosses the line. As for "sticking to the kayr", how was he not?

[@peeknaaarm1339]

Productive Jack not a debate ahki that’s me putting it polite and how can you say his the smartest in the room when you don’t know the depth of the other 2 in the room especially having the shiekh in the room, defo sounds like a family member gassing 🤣.. Anyway enjoy the knowledge shared.

[@AbuMoosaa]

Please can someone tell Shaykh Haitham to and go and sit with one of the major Scholars of out time: such as Saleh Al Fawzan, Abdul Muhsin Al Abbad.... To learn the correct understanding of Khilafah, rulers, how interact with them according to Quran and Sunnah upon the Manhaj us Salaf. He is happy living in London and inciting people to rise up. And no remorse for those who have died and displaced due to rebelling and caos spread in. Muslim lands due to people like him

[@adhkaarreminders902]

Funny thing is, he actually does. What happens in public eye is not even 1% of what Shaykh Haitham does If there was an issue the top scholars would have spoken by now surely?

[@ramadan4660]

Individuals you mentioned are unreliable as they are employees of unislamic monarchy.

[@kaz4845]

Jameel, surprised you have time to write this message, are you on boot licking break? Your Saudi sheikhs are lackeys of tyrants..

[@AbuMoosaa]

Wow. Juhhal are on here. Let's talk with ilm. Anyone who has ilm and faham will instantly know Haitham Haddad is wrong. As for this ignorant, those involved in politics will say he is a Shaykh

[@AbuMoosaa]

@@adhkaarreminders902 You think so. If he had any respect for ilm, Sunnah and Manhaj us Salaf as Salih, and the Ulamah that call to this way, do you think Haitham Haddad will oppose this path?

[@HussainFahmy]

*_Secular Sheikh is at it._*

[@Carlos-gn9hm]

No democracy in Islam

[@rahatahmed6188]

Ooh you’re ard.

[@samieik2011]

'Plato puts democracy as the penultimate system' .. why is this guy so cringe?! please someone give him a reality check. Wannabe intellectual. Lol, the first 5 mins are so cringe.

[@cpd7172]

Will the hosts please drop the bad jokes and cut to the point? Stop being so desperate in trying to show people that religious people can ‘have fun’. The Palestinian test was cringeworthy

[@omarabdul6230]

Only Jesus can save. Father said those who reject my son reject me. For the son Glorify the Father and the Father Glorify the son. We mus teach the Gospel of truth for Jesus says he is the truth and the way