“What ISIL is doing is in complete contradiction of the principles of the Islamic caliphate: a righteous caliphate which preserves the rights of all people, and respects all people and the opinions of others who are of different faiths, race, time and place,” said Sheikh Khaldoun Oraymet, secretary-general of Lebanon’s Supreme Islamic Council.
Those rights of all people are not equal rights. It was another caliphate, the Abbasid caliphate, that oversaw the institutionalization of the dictum that in the Islamic state, the non-Muslim dhimmis must “pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29). Bat Ye’or, the pioneering historian of dhimmitude, the institutionalized second-class status Islamic law stipulates for non-Muslims in the Islamic state, notes of Jews and Christians in that caliphate that “it was during the Abbasid period that their degrading status developed and was integrated into the legal system of the dar al-Islam.” She writes of the crushing taxes that the Abbasids made the dhimmis pay: “Money was extorted by blows, torture and death – particularly by crucifixion.”
“A caliphate is normally established after the entire Islamic ummah (nation) unanimously agrees to do so, Oraymet said. It requires that the rulers and people of influence — led by religious scholars — meet to consider that nation’s interest and decide to have a sole leader, sole army, sole flag and vast territory.”
This is ahistorical. Caliphates throughout the history were achieved militarily, just as the Islamic State is attempting to do.
All these fantastic claims call the denunciations themselves into question. Are they genuine, or just for Western consumption?
“Forcing us to pledge allegiance to the so-called caliph is dictatorial and unacceptable. There is no place among us for such a caliphate; it does not even exist in our dictionary or thinking.” “While what was announced is not worthy of comment or publicity, the Islamic dawah is not accomplished in this manner and is not imposed on anyone. Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) did not impose the Islamic state on anyone, so who is al-Baghdadi to make those claims?”
This is again ahistorical and fantastic, as according to Islamic tradition, Muhammad imposed the Islamic state on Arabia by force of arms, and immediately after he died, many of the Arab tribes rebelled and rejected Islam and its state, leading to the Wars of Apostasy (Ridda), in which the first caliph, Abu Bakr, forcibly brought the rebellious tribes back into the fold.
“Arab Muslims deride ISIL ‘caliphate’ as un-Islamic,” Ammon, July 4, 2014:
AMMONNEWS – Muslims speaking with Al-Shorfa from across the Arab world rejected the call by the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) to swear allegiance to its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and to accept the establishment of his “caliphate” in Iraq and Syria.
ISIL, whose violent acts have drawn outcry in the region and world, does not have the authority nor the ability to establish a “caliphate”, they said.
“What ISIL is doing is in complete contradiction of the principles of the Islamic caliphate: a righteous caliphate which preserves the rights of all people, and respects all people and the opinions of others who are of different faiths, race, time and place,” said Sheikh Khaldoun Oraymet, secretary-general of Lebanon’s Supreme Islamic Council.
Its actions are offensive to the principle and method of the righteous caliphate, and they contradict Islam, he told Al-Shorfa, adding that ISIL’s pledge of allegiance to al-Baghdadi is not a pledge by all Muslims.
The goal of Islamic dawah (proselytising) “is tawheed (oneness) in God, taarof (acquaintance so peace may prevail) and compassion among people”, Oraymet said, asking, “Does what ISIL is doing lead to all of that?”
“Al-Baghdadi and ISIL do not meet any of the conditions of the Islamic caliphate, not by any stretch,” he said. “Muslims reject what he claims, and his threats will fall on deaf ears.”
Besides, he added, the call for the establishment of a caliphate is out of its time and place.
A caliphate is normally established after the entire Islamic ummah (nation) unanimously agrees to do so, Oraymet said. It requires that the rulers and people of influence — led by religious scholars — meet to consider that nation’s interest and decide to have a sole leader, sole army, sole flag and vast territory.
Only then can all Muslims pledge allegiance to the caliphate, he said.
“On the other hand, if Arab and Muslim countries currently recognise each other’s borders and do not agree on a single ruler, and scholars and jurists have not submitted an opinion on the establishment of a caliphate, then no group of people, whoever they are, have the right to declare a caliphate,” he said.
Oraymet said all Muslims in Lebanon and in Arab and Muslim countries are “definitely and decidedly not obligated” to comply with ISIL calls.
‘PROPHET MOHAMMED DID NOT IMPOSE THE ISLAMIC STATE ON ANYONE’
The announcement of the “Islamic caliphate” is unacceptable in the name of religion and threatens Islam more than anything else, Abdul Ghani Ibrahim, an employee at a Lebanese publishing house, told Al-Shorfa.
“Forcing us to pledge allegiance to the so-called caliph is dictatorial and unacceptable,” he said. “There is no place among us for such a caliphate; it does not even exist in our dictionary or thinking.”
“While what was announced is not worthy of comment or publicity,” said Lebanese contractor Imad al-Danna, “the Islamic dawah is not accomplished in this manner and is not imposed on anyone. Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) did not impose the Islamic state on anyone, so who is al-Baghdadi to make those claims?”
“There is no place for this group, which distorts religion with its terrorist practices,” he added.
Jordanian sales manager Mohammed al-Sheikh described the caliphate as a “farce”.
“ISIL and its supporters are terrorists, and their actions show they are gangs whose only aim is to spread chaos and destruction,” he said.
The voices and forces of moderation will not allow ISIL to transform their region “with its terrorism and violent methods”, al-Sheikh added.
Adel Khalil, a Jordanian national and father of five, echoed his sentiment.
ISIL and its followers do not represent “the true moderate humanitarian Islam which calls for peace”, he said.
Who authorised these ISIL terrorists to appoint themselves as leaders over the Muslims, he asked.
“These ignorant people think they can impose their control, but that is impossible because people are familiar with their terrorist acts, killing and bloodshed,” Khalil said. “We, in the Arab countries, thirst for democracy, and ISIL’s terrorist approach will not meet with support or acceptance.”
‘OFFENSIVE TO ISLAM AND MUSLIMS’
The idea of a caliphate is “outdated by hundreds of years and is no longer viable on the ground”, Omani political analyst Ahmed al-Balushi told Al-Shorfa. “No one can any longer drive the masses to something they disapprove of.”
“How can a group that has neither a political ground nor a popular base in any country in the world, and is even viewed by the vast majority of Muslims as a terrorist group, appoint itself as a ruler of peoples who reject its ideological orientation and practices?” he said.
In Egypt, accountant Mahmoud Omran also rejected the “caliphate”.
“It is a shame that the criminal Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi could be a caliph for Muslims,” he said. “What caliph is appointed over the Islamic ummah when he is nothing but a gangster in a gang whose occupation is theft and murder, and most importantly, a gang leader whose occupation is trading in religion?”
The Arab people in general, and Muslims in particular, “are not so naive as to consent to this farce [carried out] in the name of religion”, Omran said.
Saudi merchant Rashed al-Jahni told Al-Shorfa that what ISIL is doing is a mockery and denounced its announcement of a caliphate and appointment of a caliph as “categorically unacceptable”.
Those who fall into ISIL’s trap are “imbued with distorted religious teachings taught by extremist preachers who only serve extremist religious gangs”, he said, adding, “It is time to get rid of these extremist groups which have offended Islam and Muslims.”
Twenty-four-year-old Yemeni Omar Ali Ahmed also condemned ISIL’s caliphate announcement, saying: “It is impossible for us to submit ourselves to a group that is addicted to killing and bloodshed for no reason other than to murder.”
“It is impossible for me to swear allegiance to them, even if I were the last Arab citizen to do so,” Ahmed told Al-Shorfa.
Sheikh Zaid bin Abdul Rahman bin Yahya, head of Al-Noor Centre for Studies and Research in Sanaa, said ISIL’s announcement tampers with the values of Islamic sharia and matters of the Islamic caliphate.
“Those who announced the caliphate are ignorant of sharia policies in Islam, because a caliphate is not established simply by someone announcing it and announcing [the appointment of] someone as a caliph,” said bin Yahya, who is a member of the Yemeni Scholars Association.
Such a declaration is unacceptable, he said, both in terms of the manner in which it was done and the person pegged as “caliph”, especially as his hands are stained with blood.
“What al-Qaeda and its affiliates like ISIL are doing — killing, shedding innocent blood, and carrying out destruction and devastation — is incompatible with the meaning of the caliphate, which is to build, construct and preserve the lives of individuals,” bin Yahya said.
Guy Macher says
‘PROPHET MOHAMMED DID NOT IMPOSE THE ISLAMIC STATE ON ANYONE’
Didn’t that savage read Koran 9:5?
john spielman says
evil can never stay united and so it is with Islam.
“Prophet Mohammed did not impose the islamic state on anyone” -what an outright LIE (which islam permits) as Mohammed, the pedophile pseudoprophet, forced himself upon the Arabian peninsula with the sword and butchered his way to a caliphate!
Sharpin LA says
You should look into who started the fanatical sect of “Islam,” Wahabism. I quote the word Islam because it’s not really Islamic but a bastardization of it and it acts bad and WOW Islam gets blamed, how convenient. (By way of deception we shall wage war goes very far back I see.)
You might find it interesting that the founder of Wahabism was a Jew as well as al-Su’ud (Saud). Their concurrent desire for power and control, Mohammad al-Wahabi sought religious dominance and his buddy al-Su’ud sought political power, walked them hand in hand into modern times.
Founding and history of the Wahabi sect (from the Federation of American Scientists website)
http://fas.org/irp/eprint/iraqi/wahhabi.pdf
Shitting on Islam the entire time. Now they are taking it global but the goal is much broader than anyone realizes and it’s related to Public Law 102-14.
n.a. palm says
The irony is that islam contains the seeds of it’s own destruction. Muslims can agree on almost nothing, except perpetual outrage, bloodlust and barbarism. They always contend with each other foremost, unless there are infidels around to murder. A proper foreign policy for America is to encourage this dissension and let the muslims destroy themselves.
umbra says
Muslim national leaders are not going to submit themselves as dogs to the isis caliph. They themselves simply do not wish to be slaves to another. Especially when many of them have grown accustomed to having others slaving for them.
el-cid says
Robert,
No doubt your exposure of the nonsense quality of these pronouncements are correct. Those Muslims against the caliphate do not appear to have a formal basis within Islam to counter it. The nicest assessment we could make is that it represents wishful thinking. It looks more like the “line” of the official press in Jordan.
It looks like it was constructed to counter the insurgency and revolution on the border and within Jordan by creating doubt in the minds of the faithful about whether the actions of ISIL is acceptable and sanctioned. In that regard, it sounds very contrived.
I am afraid it does not ring true for anyone. Too little, too late.
shrugger says
Well, at least the author is consistent. With every single point he makes in the article being veritably fallacious. I wonder. Is this solely for Kafir consumption? Or is it for the worlds illiterate Mohammadens as well?
I’ll give him props. It’s certainly a masterful work of taqiyya.
Islam_Macht_Frei says
Islam – a tribal political meme that empowers the most ruthless and well-armed thug in the room, and which has succeeded in marketing itself as a “religion.”
And as history shows and is showing again here, you never want to be the second-most-ruthless thug.
Zimriel says
“Omani political analyst Ahmed al-Balushi”
Probably an Ibadi – not a Shiite *or* a Sunni. They have their own ideas on how the Islamic state should run. I don’t think they even recognise such an office as “caliph”. (They did on occasion elevate an “Amir of the Believers”, which is a caliphal title in Sunnism, and refers just to Ali in Shiism.)
Kepha says
Then let’s see these other Muslim leaders get up the gumption and organization to fight ISIL.
mortimer says
Sheikh Khaldoun Oraymet (secretary-general of Lebanon’s Supreme Islamic Council) realizes his version of the caliphate is not much different than that of ISIS.
They are quibbling over commas. A caliphate is a supremacist, misogynistic tyranny from top to bottom.
This is the way Muslims lie to one another and to the disbelievers they hope to subjugate.
And some Westerners will fall for this doubletalk. So willfully blind.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
What ISIL is doing is in complete contradiction of the principles of the Islamic caliphate: a righteous caliphate which preserves the rights of all people, and respects all people and the opinions of others who are of different faiths blah blah blaaah…
Hearing this guy argue the best Islam is like watching Prez Barack Hussein campaign about healthcare. We’ve gone from the Wars of Compulsion to an endless video loop of Compulsive Lies. There can be no god but Allah and it’s every Moslems duty to fight until this ideal is attained, so said the Holy Prophet Mohammed quoting what the Archangel Gabriel said that Allah told him to tell the Holy Prophet Mohammed. A second hand account that made Islam the Religion of War. With turnspeak, of course, that means Religion of Peace, and the unanswered question about why OBL was a top-ranked Moslem celebrity in approval polls up to the day of his revenge execution.
gravenimage says
Muslim leaders denounce Islamic State’s caliphate as un-Islamic
………………………………..
Well, *this* was predictable. What they really mean is that *they* are not running the Caliphate.
More:
“A caliphate is normally established after the entire Islamic ummah (nation) unanimously agrees to do so, Oraymet said. It requires that the rulers and people of influence — led by religious scholars — meet to consider that nation’s interest and decide to have a sole leader, sole army, sole flag and vast territory.”
………………………………..
As noted, this is simply ahistorical bs. This has *never* happened.
And the Caliphate is never secure, either—not only does the Caliph fight his way into power, but then he has to fend off rivals, palace intrigues, invasions, and revolts.
Occasionally a son will succeed his father, but that’s about as stable as it gets.
More:
‘PROPHET MOHAMMED DID NOT IMPOSE THE ISLAMIC STATE ON ANYONE’
………………………………..
More bs. The “Prophet” took over Medina after being foolishly invited in, and he murdered or exiled—or exiled and later enslaved and slaughtered—anyone who seemed to challenge him or present a rival.
More:
Only then can all Muslims pledge allegiance to the caliphate, he said.
………………………………..
This has never happened, either—save perhaps in the earliest days of Islam.
Despite widespread nostalgia and idealization of the last Caliphate, many Muslims hated and resented the Turks’ rule.
We can see this with the Arab revolt once the Ottoman Empire was sufficiently weakened.
Many of the descendants of these rebels are now bizarrely idealizing the Ottomans.
And needless to say, the Caliphate has *always* been savagely repressive to non-Muslims.
Under the last Caliphate we saw the horrific Armenian Genocide, which was much more widespread than that term—terrible as it is—implies.
Not only were Armenian Christians targeted, but also Greek and “Levantine” and Assyrian Christians, as well as Jews. Really, all Infidels.
By the early 20th century, the heart of the Caliphate was virtually rid of non-Muslims—they had massacred or driven out well over a million people.
James Foard says
Here is ISIL’s newly released video showing the muslim leaders having a war conference:
James Foard says
In fact, this is actually Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIL, with his top generals
gary says
There is no “right side” in this war. Al Qaeda decapitates their enemies and ISIS crucifies theirs. And THAT is a distinguishing feature for Fawaz Gerges?!
But what is even more laughingly pathetic is the extent to which Gerges will go to exculpate what he considers mainstream “moderate” islam. “Taqiyyah” by any other name, i guess. Not even the most mainstream islamic institution—-Research Academy at Cairo’s al-Azhar University—-agrees with Gerges about the caliphate.
Although Fawaz Gerges, along with his fellow apologists for islam, have all been revising history and islamic doctrine in the popular media, now that the term “caliphate” is popularized and needs redefining.
Gerges’ assertions are shown to be erroneous and ahistoric here:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/07/muslim-leaders-denounce-islamic-states-caliphate-as-un-islamic
And he should thank Brian for withholding the question, “What should Obama do?” Because it seems Gerges finally favors taking a side now. Unlike during the 8 years Bush was president, when Gerges consistently opposed any actions Bush had taken against jihadists.
Jocelyn Kerr Holding says
Having lived for a short while with “peace loving Muslims”, I read the Article with great interest.
My experience is anxiety, fear, quasi hatred and embarrassment, felt by open minded Muslims for Their Jihadi brothers. But having said that, unfortunately they are reticent to criticism them, especially in front of non Muslims who are anxious for their opinions. They end up changing the subject. What a pity! Things could actually be changed if they didn’t take this attitude. Moderate Muslims far out number those who are radical.