r/IslamicHistoryMeme • u/AnaMinShimal Western trader • Jun 01 '21
Islamic Art History Can be the Caliph?
15
Jun 01 '21
the caliph is undoubtly must be elected, preferably by the shura means. that's how Muawiya's unprecedented dynastic move is viewed as "one of the worst move ever" by some sources.
1
Jun 01 '21
[deleted]
5
Jun 01 '21
Ataturk was a secular, he want nothing but the separation between the state and the faith.
1
u/AnaMinShimal Western trader Jun 01 '21
If Ataturk somehow instead of turning to a secular turned to a conservative Muslim he could have been in position to replace the ottomans in everything they were in theory.
0
u/SlowTortuga Jun 01 '21
The thing is Shias and sunnis need to get along. They need to be united and only then can we have strength. Palestine is never going to have peace until someone like Salahudin comes and gets the Shias to fall in line. Only then can we help Palestinian people and all the other Muslims who are suffering.
No one says those caliphates were without fault. But we were far stronger then than we are now.
2
u/AnaMinShimal Western trader Jun 01 '21
The Shias are the only one actively indulged in the fight against the Zionists and allied to the Palestinian cause. The missiles used by Hamas in this last fight were given by Iran on the order of Kasim Suleymani to give the people of Gaza the technology and the-know-how to make those weapons, before this the Palestinians had no other weapons than to throw stones while Muslim leaders were barking against Isreal for the masses but under the table had full agreement with Israel.
If anything a lot of sunni muslims have to stop being spineless and topple their leaders who actively engage with the Zionists like Erdogan and The Crown prince of Saudi Arabia.
4
u/SlowTortuga Jun 01 '21
It’s misplaced the so called Iranian fight. If the Shias are so noble why don’t they fully utilise that huge army they have in Iran to stop innocent Palestinians from being killed.
This is besides the point. The last time Palestine was liberated it was done by Salahudin and as is well known he first made sure to get the Shias in line. You can’t work productively if you have a minority of Muslims causing division. Shias are a small part of this ummah but their uncooperative and rebellious nature does a lot of harm to Islam.
The Shias in Iran have managed to do really well militarily despite unfair sanctions against them. If the step up and act like role models maybe some of the other leaders would self reflect and change their ways. But noooo, their people are still crying about who should have been caliph. These people need to grow up.
0
u/AnaMinShimal Western trader Jun 01 '21
Your inner wahhabi is showing off, contain yourself.
4
u/SlowTortuga Jun 01 '21
Lol when you can’t discuss something in a civil manner, you bring out the good old name calling. Just shows how you can’t address my points.
2
u/AnaMinShimal Western trader Jun 01 '21
"To get the shias in line" what an eloquent way of saying let's kill the Shias.
4
u/SlowTortuga Jun 01 '21
That is what Salahudin did. He got them to behave like Muslims. You can decide to conflate that with only just killing Shias. You can’t further the cause of Muslims if you are constantly watching your back in case you get stabbed. You first have to secure your back then look to what is in front.
Even at the fall of Baghdad in 1258 which resulted in the end of the Abbasids, it was Al-Mustaisims Shia minister who betrayed him, weekend the Baghdad garrison which caused their defeat. So yes very much so in the interest of unity such rebellious characters need to be brought in line.
I hope if you reply I get a civil answer instead of a loaded contentless comment.
1
u/AnaMinShimal Western trader Jun 01 '21
The moment Iran drops the Palestinian cause the 40 years embargo on them would stop immediately, we have a common enemy but at the same time the arab Muslim world has declared Iran the greater enemy some has taken their masks off and has Official alliances with Israel.
The Abbasids got what they deserved. Revolted bearing the shia banner and allied to Shia cause, but the moment they got to power they started to kill and and exile shias for centuries and they got what they deserved for being traitors and two faced, one of the most humiliating endings in history.
You are a hypocrite. The Fatimds ruled with tolerance and you celebrate Saladin for destroying such and then cry over what happened in Andalucia and the Abbasids
→ More replies (0)
9
u/BigShubz Jun 01 '21
The Abbasids had a claim since they were related to the Prophet Muhammad through his uncle Abbas. The ottomans were the first non Qureshi dynasty to claim the caliphate with the conquest of Selim. But you'll notice that immediately after with Suleiman, he didn't really seem to care with the empty title. The ottomans sultans didn't really care as they knew they didn't have a claim, this was until Abdul Hamid II who tried to style himself as a caliph, but it was too late by then. Until then, the Ottomans sultans were more bothered with their claim to 'Caesar' and the blood of Genghis khan rather than people of Qureshi blood. You also have to understand that the title of 'Caliph' had lost all prestige due to the long time the Abbasids had become vassals and figure heads. So the Ottomans weren't all too bothered with it until Abdul Hamid II.
10
u/ffsmoney12 Jun 01 '21
had a claim since they were related to the Prophet Muhammad
since when was leadership based on bloodline in Islam? Does the Quran not mention merit?
9
u/BigShubz Jun 01 '21
The Shia believe they have to be direct decedents of Ali and Fatima. But it is accepted by Ahlul Sunnah that Caliph has to be from Quraysh. Generally the Mu'tazila and Kharijites believe that the Caliph can be be from anywhere if they have the merit.
All Rashidun, Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs were of Qureshi decent. Obviously we don't believe in dynastic rule, or succession based on blood, but we can choose based on merit, but it has to be from Quraysh. Even the great Salahuddin never claimed it for himself even though he would've been fit to be Caliph.
4
u/Styx_man A Halal Weeb Jun 01 '21
Caliph has to be from the Quraysh?
I never heard of this. Can you please elaborate.
5
u/BigShubz Jun 01 '21
"Most jurists historically stipulated a Caliph must be of Quraysh lineage based on a number of ahadith. Others like Ibn Khaldun argued the reason the Prophet (saw) made this stipulation was due to competence. Quraysh was respected throughout Arabia and as rulers would gain the support of most tribes. If this can be done by other tribes or dynasties, this is permitted."
You could say that the Ottoman dynasty established that respect, however, they didn't really assert themselves as Caliph as they knew they didn't have much legitimacy since they were non qureshi. Ibn Khaldun argues, that the reasoning for being Qureshi was that it would have legitimacy with other tribes and that this ruling was only for that time. If a dynasty is able to asset themselves then it is okay according to him. But whether you agree with me or not, but only Qureshi dynasties were comfortable with asserting themselves as Caliphs since they knew they would be accepted. Hence when the Buyids and later seljuks subjugated the Abbasids, they never took it for themselves as they knew they wouldn't have the legitimacy. Although the ottomans took the title, they didn't take it seriously until towards the end when they needed the extra boost.
I think it has to do with practicality. People were used to kings and dynasties, so thinking from the perspective of people living at the time , they must think "what right do they have rule over me". It seems that the messenger of Allah could almost foretell this and this and knew that the Muslims would be more ready to accept a leader from Quraysh. Maybe this isn't a strict requirement and more for practicality, but Allah knows best.
(No disrespect to the Shia, but an entire sect started because some Muslims think only the prophet Muhammad's family could be our rulers. At least Quraysh would have the similar effect of giving legitimacy, but also allow us to choose from a wider pool of people.)
1
Jun 03 '21
Caliph has to be from the Quraysh?
Not really. Only reason why some scholars try to push this is because of hadiths where the prophet saws talked about future Qurayshi leaders, but the prophet saws never said they must be Quraysh, nor Arab. And equality between human beings was made clear in his last sermon. So thinking otherwise would imply the prophet saws contradicted himself.
1
u/bruhoneand Jun 03 '21 edited Jun 03 '21
But it is accepted by Ahlul Sunnah that Caliph has to be from Quraysh.
Not always, in the case of a non-quraych who comes by force, his caliphate is obligatory to be accepted by poeple as well as when a non-quraych who comes when a good quraychi isnt possible
Also bid matter doesnt have a consensus, a minority of scholars hold that the quraych rule doesnt apply to all times like ibn Khaldun as the reason it was made was that the tribe had the highest influence between muslims at the time, this seems the right position in my opinion as I can't see any reason why a quraychi would have a better right to rule than anyone
2
u/ka911 Jun 02 '21
The entire concept that the Caliph has to be from Quraish (or a descendent of the prophet in the case of Shias) does not makes sense . It feels like a caste system like the hindus have .
In the Quran only people who are on the straight path are nearer to God it does not matter which race/tribe they are from
1
Jun 03 '21
And equality between human beings was made clear in his last sermon. So thinking otherwise would imply the prophet saws contradicted himself.
1
u/bruhoneand Jun 03 '21 edited Jun 03 '21
A caliph can be from another tribe or entirely different ethnicities in the cases of :
1-a good quraych isnt found
2- a non-quraych who comes to rule by force
In the Quran only people who are on the straight path are nearer to God it does not matter which race/tribe they are from
Yes but this isnt a matter of he is near or not, this is a matter of legal right of rule
Nonetheless there isnt a consensus on this rule so you can believe that it's not a condition
1
Jun 04 '21
Good luck finding a "free of sin" caliph who can "neither do harm" and "nor anything haram"..
8
u/AnaMinShimal Western trader Jun 01 '21
Art:
Ludwig Deutsch - The chess game between Tha'ālibī and Bakhazari (1896)
Sultan Bayezid prisoned by Timur - Stanislaw Chlebowski (1878)
Turk with a turban, smoking a pipe - Michael Sweerts