If I may, I would like to draw your attention to an article written by a movement who regard the establishment of a universal Islamic state as obligatory (fard) upon every Muslim. To them, universal Islamic State is the meaning of Khilafah . The actual article is available online at http://www.khilafah.com entitled "Islam is an Ideology." I have a few queries regarding the content of the article. It states: "It is well known that Islam is built upon five pillars, the shahada , prayer, fasting, hajj and zakat . Ibn Omar , the son of Omar bin Al-Khattab , may Allah be pleased with both, is reported to have said "I heard the messenger of Allah say: "Islam has been built on five [pillars]: testifying that there is no ilah but Allah and that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, performing the prayers, paying the zakat , making the pilgrimage to the House, and fasting in Ramadan ." related by Bukhari and Muslim . When applying Islam in life it is incumbent upon the believers to follow the Sunnah of Muhammad (saw) and not to innovate nor add anything to it. So the manner of prayer is well defined in the Sunnah and it is unacceptable to pray in another manner. Muhammad (saw) said "Any matter not taken from our order is rejected" and Allah Ta'ala says "Whatever the Messenger gave you take it, and whatever he rejected leave it". Therefore the manner of building the Islamic way of life upon the five pillars must be taken from the Prophet (saw) and not from any other basis as he (saw) established Islam completely and in the best manner and all other references are a false reference and will not earn Allah's pleasure, we seek refuge with Allah from that. The Shahada is the Foundation, or the first pillar, of Islam: the statement, which brings a person from the darkness of ignorance into the light of Islam. If understood correctly this statement becomes the basis from which the life of a Muslim emanates. This is the statement, which the enemies of Islam do not want the Muslim to understand. This was the statement, which was responsible, at first for the persecution of the earlier Muslims and, later, for the great victory of Islam. It is this word, which distinguishes the Muslim from the Kafir , the believer from the disbeliever. The performers of actions are praised or dispraised depending on whether they utter this word. If a capitalist company director who does not believe in Islam is seen giving money to a charitable cause, the people will naturally be suspicious and accuse him of using the gift for his benefit. Whereas, if a Muslim does the same action, Muslims will assume that he is seeking no more than to gain closeness to his Lord. The Shahada is the testification that there is none worthy of worship than Allah, that there is none to submit to than Allah, that Allah is the sole one worthy of referring to and no other way should be followed than that of Allah's. The key in understanding this statement is in the words "no ilah ...". Ilah means the One who creates, legislates, has to be obeyed, worshipped, from who you take your life style, to whom you submit your will to, from whom you take all your ideas and concepts about life, and according to whose instruction you live your life and treat others. Thus, this Shahada states that there is nothing that possesses these qualities but Allah (swt). However, if we give any of these powers to any other entity, then that entity becomes our god and we have nullified the shahada . This shirk was explained by Allah (swt) in the following ayah as the very mistake that the Christians and the Jews have made until the present day: "They have taken their rabbis and priests as lords other than Allah." This ayah was explained by the Messenger of Allah (saw), as reported by Tirmidhi on the authority of Adi bin Hatim who was a Christian before accepting Islam. Adi who had just accepted Islam, heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) recite the above ayat . He objected, "They do not worship their priests." The Prophet (saw) replied, "Whatever their priests and rabbis call permissible, they accept as permissible; whatever they declare as forbidden, they consider as forbidden, and thus they worship them." So Islam forbids for any legislation to be taken other than that contained in the Qur'an and Sunnah . Allah says "The ruling is for none but Allah" and "Rule between them by what Allah has revealed". Therefore making the Shar'iah as the basis of actions by individuals and society is the practical implementation of the Shahada in life. If other than the Shariah is followed then the Shahada is neglected and the first pillar of Islam is missing from life. In this situation the way of life cannot be described as Islamic." If I may ask, is this concept of "political shirk " correct? Does it in fact have any basis in Islam? "The Islamic State is established on the Aqeeda . It is not allowed by the Shari'a to be separated from that in any way whatsoever. So when the Messenger of Allah (saw) established the State in Madinah on the basis of the Islamic Aqeeda , the verses of law had not yet been revealed. He made the Shahada 'There is no ilah but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah' the basis of the Muslim's life, and the basis of the relations between people, the basis of removing the injustice and settling the disputes i.e. the basis of their entire life, and the basis of ruling and authority. Islam obliged Muslims to maintain the Islamic Aqeeda as a permanent basis for the State. Islam ordered them to bear arms and fight in case flagrant Kufr (Kufr buwah) appeared in the State. The Messenger of Allah (saw) was asked about the tyrant rulers: "Should we not then resist them?" He (saw) said: "No, as long as they continue to establish prayer among you." i.e. as long as they rule by Islam. It was also narrated by Ubada ibn Samit concerning the pledge that he (saw) said: "that we would not dispute with the people in authority, unless you witness flagrant Kufr of which you have a conclusive proof from Allah." "The remaining pillars upon which the Islamic way of life is built themselves have the shahada as their foundation and they follow the same principle that their manner of implementation must be taken from Islam. Each of them remains suspended in part while the Islamic state is not existent, as they depend upon the state for their full implementation. It is unacceptable to leave any of these pillars of Islam in this state and it means that our worship to Allah is incomplete without their full application." Is this true that these basic practices of Islam are incomplete and lacking if there exists no Islamic State? For example, the article continues to say that: "The arkan (pillars) of prayer are as much a part of the duty of establishing the Salah as the provision of facilities for congregational prayer are. Also are the education of prayer and creating the environment where prayer is normal and there are no obstacles to praying. The book 'bidayat al-Mujtahid' by Ibn Rushd contains a page documenting the discussion between the Imams of the four schools about the punishment for the one who does not pray. All agreed that the person should be punished but disputed whether death or imprisonment was the suitable penalty. However, today, no ruler in the world treats the prayer as an obligation protected by the state's law and enforced by the judiciary and police. Rather the principles of 'free-choice' and 'freedom of worship' are preferred over Allah's command. This only proves that for the prayer to be fully implemented requires the apparatus of a state which creates the atmosphere where prayer is understood to be an obligation and not optional." Would you please confirm that this exposition of the role of an Islamic State in prayer is correct? " Ramadhan is coming soon, and we pray to Allah that we do not see the same scenes as in previous years, where Muslims have so many Ramadhans and Eids . Allah Ta'ala only allowed the Muslims to have one Eid and Muhammad (saw) warned that 'only Shaytan fasts on Eid day', which proves the obligation of Muslims unifying on the beginning and end of Ramadhan . Yet unless the Khilafah is re-established, which would unify the Muslims' lands under one authority, how can we expect to see the Muslims unify their fasts? With over fifty nation states' rulers all trying to gain legitimacy for their nationalist divisions and each despising what will unify the Muslims, we do not remain optimistic that the fasts will be unified under these conditions." The above implies that there needs to a universal Islamic State encompassing all Muslim nations in order to unify fasts. In your view, is this opinion credible and supported by the Qur'an and the Sunnah? "Any Hajji can testify that Hajj obviously cannot be organized without a state. The task is just too enormous and costly to be done otherwise. However today the nation of the Saudia family, who do not make shahada as the basis of their state, enforce their kufr nationalistic policies upon the hajjis to the point that the whole worship becomes tainted by the constant reminder of the disobedience to Allah. Hajj is another pillar, which depends upon the sighting of the moon and its announcement by the leader of the Muslims. Yet today the moon must be sighted by a Saudi national before the day of Dhul-hijjah is announced, regardless whether it has already been seen elsewhere by another Muslim." Is the above viewpoint credible in the light of the Qur'an and Sunnah? "Finally, Zakat requires more than a voluntary offering for its establishment. It is entirely dependent upon the existence of a state for its full implementation. It is the Khalifah who appoints the Zakat collectors who are the only authorized agents to collect and distribute according to the eight allowed categories. During the time of Muhammad (saw) and the Sahaba never did we witness a time when Zakat was not managed by the State. "Alms are for the poor, the needy, the employees who administer the funds, those whose hearts have been recently reconciled to the Truth, those in bondage, those in debt, in the cause of Allah, and the wayfarer, (thus it is ) ordained by Allah, and Allah is most knowledgeable, most wise."(TMQ 9: 60) In fact some of the categories of distributing Zakat depend upon the State for their existence. For those employed to administer the funds by the State. An individual may not employ himself as an administrator of Zakah . For those close to accepting Islam. This category can only be applied in an Islamic State. Whenever the term " Fi Sabeelillah (in the path of Allah)" is associated with spending (Infaaq) , it means Jihad . It does not mean to spend anywhere one interprets to be the path of Allah (swt). If this were the case, then mentioning categories would become meaningless. Furthermore, as with prayer and fasting the ruler is obliged to punish the one who does not pay the Zakat . Abu Bakr (ra) said "By Allah I will fight them even if the withheld the string to tie a camel" when many people refused to pay Zakat after the death of Muhammad (saw)." Please kindly confirm whether the above opinion has been credibly reached. Is their basis for this opinion correct and credible? "In conclusion, from looking at the famous five pillars of Islam we can see that Islam defined the obligation and also the manner of its implementation. In fact these five pillars cry out for a State to exist in order for their full establishment to be achieved. This is the nature of Islam as it is an ideology. Islam not only provides solutions for mankind's problems but also the method to implement, propagate and protect them in life so that they become more than theoretical rules. Rather they are transformed to practical rules and make the Islamic way of life existent. That is why when one of the Sahabi delegates to Persia, Ribay ibn Amir , was asked about his objective in coming, he replied, "Allah sent us to liberate [mankind] from the submission to other human beings to the submission to the Lord of the human beings and from the oppression of religions to the justice of Islam, and from the anguish of this life to the bliss of this life and the hereafter"." If I may ask, is such a conclusion credible on the basis of the Qur'an and the Sunnah ? O Allah, Let us understand Islam with the same clarity as Ribay and the Sahaba so that we work to establish the Islamic way of life and not just individualistic worships. Imam Ali is reported to have said, "Two types of people I cannot tolerate are - a scholar who is shameless and an ignorant worshiper. The ignorant worshipper fools the people with his worship and the scholar with his shamelessness." What does the saying ascribed to Imam Ali mean? Is it relevant? Thank you kindly...