From the aqidah of a Muslim is that he believes, in accordance with the revealed texts, that the khilaafah lasted for thirty years, that Allaah raised it, and replaced it with kingship, and that prior to the approach of the hour, Allaah will send down the khilaafah upon the Prophetic methodology. And this contains glad tidings for the Muslim who shows concern for his aqidah and strives to purify his belief, returning to that which the Companions were upon in the time of Prophethood and the rightly-guided khilaafah.
The hadeeth narrated by Safeenah (radiallaahu anhu), that the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said:
خلافة النبوة ثلاثون سنة ثم يؤتي الله الملك من يشاء
The Prophetic khilaafah
will last for thirty years. Then Allaah will give the dominion to whomever He wills.
Reported by Abu Dawud and al-Haakim. Saheeh al-Jaami’ as-Sagheer (no. 3257) declared Saheeh by Imaam al-Albaani (rahimahullaah).
And in the Sunan of Abu Dawud, there occurs after this hadeeth, what is said by Sa’eed bin Jamhaan, who narrated from Safeenah:
قال سفينة: امسك، خلافة أبي بكر رضي الله عنه سنتين، وعمر رضي الله عنه عشراً، وعثمان رضي الله عنه اثنتي عشر، وعلي ستّاً
Safeenah said (to me): Hold on (meaning, listen), the khilaafah
of Abu Bakr (radiallaahu anhu) was two years, and [that of] Umar (radiallaahu anhu) was ten years, and [that of] Uthmaan (radiallaahu anhu) twelve years, and [that of] Alee (radiallaahu anhu) six years.
Abu Dawud, Kitaab us-Sunnah, Chapter on the Khulafaa, (no. 4647).
Also reported by Safeenah, the saying of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam):
الخلافة بعدي في أمتي ثلاثون سنة ثم ملك بعد ذلك
after me in my Ummah will last for thirty years. Then there will be kingship
Reported in the Musnad Imaam Ahmad, by at-Tirmidhi, Musnad Abi Ya’laa, and Ibn Hibbaan. Saheeh al-Jaami’ as-Sagheer (no. 3341) declared Saheeh by Imaam al-Albaani (rahimahullaah).
From Hudhayfah that the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said:
تكون النبوة فيكم ما شاء الله أن تكون ، ثم يرفعها الله إذا شاء أن يرفعها ، ثم تكون خلافة على منهاج النبوة ، فتكون ما شاء الله أن تكون ، ثم يرفعها الله إذا شاء أن يرفعها ، ثم تكون ملكا عاضا ، فيكون ما شاء الله أن تكون ، ثم يرفعها الله إذا شاء أن يرفعها ، ثم يكون ملكا جبريا ، فتكون ما شاء الله أن تكون ، ثم يرفعها إذا شاء أن يرفعها ، ثم تكون خلافة على منهاج النبوة ، ثم سكت
The Prophethood will remain amongst you for as long as Allaah wills it to be. Then Allaah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be the khilaafah upon the Prophetic methodology. And it will last for as long as Allaah wills it to last. Then Allaah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be biting kingship, and it will remain for as long as Allaah wills it to remain. Then Allaah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be tyrannical (forceful) kingship and it will remain for as long as Allaah wills it to remain. Then He will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be a khilaafah upon the Prophetic methodology.
Then he (the Prophet) was silent.
Reported by Ahmad and Abu Dawud. Silsilah as-Saheehah of Imaam al-Albani (1/34 no. 5) and it is Saheeh. And Shaykh al-Albaani (rahimahullaah) commented upon this hadeeth saying:
ومن البعيد عندي حمل الحديث على عمر بن العزيز ؛ لأن خلافته كانت قريبة العهد بالخلافة الراشدة ، ولم يكن بعد ملكان : ملك عاض وملك جبرية والله أعلم
And it is remote, in my view, to apply this hadeeth to (the khilaafah) of Umar bin Abdil-Azeez, because his khilaafah
was close to the rightly-guided khilaafah
, and the two types of kingship
, the biting kingship
and forced, tyrannical kingship
had not occurred after (the rightly-guided khilaafah).
And Abu Umaamah relates that the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said:
لتنقضن عرى الإسلام عروة عروة فكلما انتقضت عروة تشبث الناس بالتي تليها فأولهن نقضا الحكم و آخرهن الصلاة
The handholds of Islaam will be annulled, one by one, and every time a handhold is annulled the people will hold fast to the one that follows it. The first of them to be annulled is the rule (al-hukm), and the last of them is the prayer (as-salaat).
Reported by Ahmad in his Musnad, Ibn Hibbaan and al-Haakim. Saheeh al-Jaami’ as-Sagheer (no. 5057) of Shaykh al-Albaanee who declared it Saheeh.
And Shaykh Abdul-Azeez bin Baz (rahimahullaah) commented, upon the previous hadeeth (as occurs in Majmoo’ ul-Fataawa wa Maqaalaat al-Mutanawwi’ah):
ومعنى قوله في الحديث: “وأولها نقضاً الحكم” معناه ظاهر وهو: عدم الحكم بشرع الله وهذا هو الواقع اليوم في غالب الدول المنتسبة للإسلام. ومعلوم أن الواجب على الجميع هو الحكم بشريعة الله في كل شيء والحذر من الحكم بالقوانين والأعراف المخالفة للشرع المطهر
And the meaning of his saying in the hadeeth: “The first of them to be anulled is the rule (al-hukm)
“, its meaning is apparent, and it is the absence of ruling by the legislation of Allaah, and this is what is present today in most of the states ascribing to Islaam. And it is known that what is obligatory upon all is to judge by the Sharee’ah of Allaah in all things and to beware of judging by the secular laws, and the customs that oppose the pure legislation.
Notes and Benefits
In these divinely revealed texts, there is a refutation of the likes of Hizb ut-Tahrir, al-Muhajiroon, and all the fake group-names they go under, “the Ghurubaa”, “the Saved Sect” and so on, recently parading under the banner of “Salafiyyah”, deceiving the Muslims, as has been the habit of their fake scholar, Omar Bakri, the man with fake credentials. The khilaafah only lasted thirty years and there has been no khilaafah since that time, rather it has been kingship up until this day of ours, with an honourable mention of the rule of mercy of Mu’aawiyah (radiallaahu anhu) and the rule of Umar bin Abdul-Azeez (rahimahullaah). And this indicates the ignorance of these people who go around chanting “1924″ thinking, in their compound ignorance, that the khilaafah was abolished in 1924 and that the Ottoman State was a khilaafah, when it was hereditary kingship, judging with a mixture of Hanafi law and the “Qanun” law based upon localized customs (urf), much of which were remnants of the Yasaa of Genghis Khan.
Affirmation through the divinely revealed text that Mu’aawiyyah was the first king in Islaam, and that from his time, hereditary kingship was the mode of rule, and that Allaah gives the rule to whomever He pleases. And that after the Prophetic khilaafah a biting type of kingship appeared, one in which Islaam was not applied completely in all areas and in which there were errors and transgressions. It was in this midst that the innovations of the Qadariyyah and the Murji’ah also appeared. Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah explains (Majmoo’ 10/354):
of Mu’aawiyah was one of mercy, and when Mu’aawiyah departed – may Allaah’s mercy be upon him – and the leadership of Yazeed came, and there occured therein the tribulation of the killing of Husain in Iraq, and the fitnah of the people of Harrah in Madinah, and the siege of Makkah, when Abdullah bin Zubayr made his stand. Then Yazeed passed away and the Ummah split, Ibn az-Zubayr in the Hijaaz, Banu al-Hakam in Shaam, and al-Mukhtaar bin Abee Ubayd seizing power in Iraaq. All of this took place at the end of the period of the Companions, when there only remained the likes of Abdullah ibn ‘Abaas, Abdullah ibn Umar, Jaabir ibn ‘Abdullah, Abu Saeed al-Khudree and others. The innovations
of the Qadariyyah and the Murji’ah then occurred and it was rejected by those Companions who remained, as they had, along with others, refuted the innovations
of the Khawaarij and the Raafidah (previously).
And all of this occurred just prior to the emergence of the innovations of the Jahmiyyah and the Mu’tazilah in the early second century hijrah.
And regarding what took place of the annulment of the rule (al-hukm), and the splitting and division of power, and the forced, tyrannical kingship (mulk jabariyy) that then took place in the Ummah, then the Scholars have clarified that obedience is due to these rulers in whatever is ma’roof (good), and the fact that there was no khilaafah was not an abrogation of what is found in the Book and the Sunnah of the obligation to obey the rulers in that which is ma’roof (good).
Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajr said in al-Fath (7/13):
The Fuqaha, Jurists are in agreement concerning the obligation to give obedience to the Sultan who took over them by force and also to perform Jihaad along with him. [And that] obeying him is better than rebelling against him due to what this would contain of the shedding of blood and subduing of the common masses.
Shaikh Abdul-Lateef bin ‘Abdur-Rahmaan bin Hassan Aal Shaikh said as occurs in “Majmu’ Rasa’il wal-Masa’il an-Najdiyah” (3/128):
And the People of Knowledge are unanimously agreed concerning giving obedience to the one who took over them by force in whatever constitutes goodness. They see it necessary to fulfil his orders and hold the correctness of his Imaamah, leadership. No two people [amongst them] differ concerning that. They also deem it impermissible to rebel against him with the sword and to divide the Ummah, even if the leaders are sinful, so long as they do not see clear open kufr
. The various texts [of these Jurists] from the four Imams and other than them and their likes in this regard are [certainly] present.
Shaikh ul-Islaam Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhaab said as occurs in “Ad-Durar as-Sunniyah fil-Ajwibat un-Najdiyyah” (7/239):
The Imaams from every Madhhab are agreed concerning the one the forcefully took over a region or regions that he has the ruling of “Imaam” in all matters. If this had not been so then the affairs of the world would never have been established. This is because for a very long time, before the era of Imaam Ahmad
till this day of ours, the people have never gathered behind a single Imaam. And they do not know anyone from the Scholars who has mentioned that any of the Shareeýah rulings cannot be correct [effected, implemented] except by the overall Imaam [the Khalifah].
As-San’aanee, in explanation of the hadeeth, “Whoever left obedience [to the Imaam] and separated from the Jamaa’ah and then died, then his is a death of Jaahiliyyah“, said, as occurs in Subul us-Salaam “Sharh Bulugh ul-Marýam min Adillat il-Ahkaam” (3/499):
His saying, “…left obedience
…”, meaning obedience to the Khalifah concerning whom there is agreeement. And it is as if the intent here is the Khalifah of a particular region because the people have never gathered together behind a single Khalifah in all the lands of Islaam since the time of the Abbasi State. Rather, the people of every region were independent with someone presiding over their affairs. If the hadeeth was taken to mean the overall Khalifah which the people of Islam had united behind, there would have been no benefit in it.
Ash-Shawkaani said in “as-Sail al-Jaraar” (4/512):
As for when Islaam spread and its territories expanded and its regions became distant [from each other], then it is known that in all of these regions loyalty was given to an Imaam or Sultaaný So there is no harm in the multiplicity of Imaams and Sultaans and it is obligatory for those people in whose land his orders and prohibitions become effective to give obedience to him after having giving bai’ah to him. It is likewise for the people of all the other regions.
Despite the absence of the khilaafah and the annulment of the rule (al-hukm), it is still, nevertheless, obligatory upon all rulers to strive to abide and judge by the Sharee’ah in all of the affairs, in aqidah, in ibaadah, in mu’aamalah, in the sharee’ah rulings, in trade, commerce, punishments and so on.