Controversy erupted last week when Hizb-ut-Tahrir (HT), the decades-old Islamic political organization dedicated to the re-establishment of the Khilafa, or Caliphate, held its first ever convention on American soil in suburban Chicago, right in my backyard. Many on the right were sounding alarm bells about an "Islamic supremacist group" holding a conference on American soil, and a number of protesters gathered to voice their opposition to the group. One wonders why, after so many years of simply distributing leaflets and their newsletter ("Khalifornia"), they decided to have a conference in America, where they have heretofore had a minimal impact at best.

This contrasts sharply with their relative success in other countries across the world, such as the U.K., Denmark, Australia, and even Indonesia, where they attracted 100,000 supporters to a rally in Jakarta. In their American debut, they could not even attract 1,000 people. This may have to do with their identity politics: they are all about "us vs them," and this may resonate more with Muslim minority communities in Europe and elsewhere, where the Muslim minority - especially after 9/11 and with the rise of the right - has lately been under siege.

Yet in America, again, they have long remained marginal, and it may have to do with their past actions. I have long known those who claim to represent HT in America as disrespectful, disruptive rabble rousers who interrupt speeches, Friday sermons, and lectures - including my own. I remember how terribly disruptive they were at several ISNA conferences several years back, even locking arms and yelling out: "In il hukmu illa lillah," or "Verily all sovereignty belongs to God," during a lecture. When I was in college, members of HT were notorious at causing fights and disruptions at the local mosque, and it made going there a very unpleasant experience for me.

I remember an event at a prominent mosque in Chicago that had former U.S. Attorney Ramsey Clark as the keynote speaker. Members of HT swarmed the event and, in a seemingly choreographed manner, got up during Mr. Clark's speech and started yelling and interrupting him. They openly insulted Mr. Clark and had to be forcibly removed from the mosque, all the while yelling out, "Fear God O Believers!" My brother was president of the MSA at a Chicago university, and members of HT gave him the most difficult time, clearly trying to wrest leadership of the chapter from him. They fought him on almost everything the MSA was doing, even down to how many volleyball nets should be put up at the MSA picnic. It really took a toll on him.

Yet, my distaste for Hizb-ut-Tahrir is not out of some personal vendetta because they interrupted my Friday sermons. Its actions are frequently counterproductive to the work of American Muslims in the greater society. Take the title of its Chicago conference as a prime example: "Fall of Capitalism and the Rise of Islam." It seems to have been purposefully designed to evoke a visceral response of disgust from most non-Muslim Americans. It did just that, in fact, in me. In one fell swoop, the title both insults Western ideals and evokes fear of an Islamic "bogeyman" about to strike. Now, there is nothing wrong with criticising capitalism as an economic system - that is its right. Yet, Hizb-ut-Tahrir can show tact in how to deliver such a criticism, which clearly it did not.

Moreover, HT's political philosophy is as counterproductive as its public actions. It claims that voting and civic participation is "haram," or forbidden. How are Muslims supposed to fulfill their God-given obligation to improve the earth and society around them? HT's answer is to separate from the kufr, or "infidel," society. Separation and segregation will help no one, neither Muslims nor their non-Muslim neighbors, friends, and co-workers, who need more, not less, interaction with their Muslim compatriots. Moreover, I find it horribly ungrateful that HT would issue unending criticisms of Western society as "evil and decadent," yet continue to enjoy the freedom said "evil and decadent" society accords them. If the West is so bad, why not leave?

Then there is the crux of their very existence: the re-establishment of the Caliphate. How is such a lofty goal to be achieved? Their answer to this question is elusive. And what is the Caliphate, anyway? Are we really supposed to work for the establishment of a "global Islamic government"? Who would be the Caliph? Where would the capital be? What are Muslims, born and raised in the West, to do if and when this Caliphate is established? Leave their homes, families, and lives? HT remains silent on these issues. I think Muslim activist and writer Junaid Afeef summed it up best when he said that the Caliphate is "an idea that we need to work toward justice and just society, one that's ruled in a [manner] that promotes justice and equality to all people. That idea of a worldwide global empire run by a Muslim leader...it's a farce."

On its website, Hizb-ut-Tahrir claims it works to "cultivate a Muslim community that lives by Islam in thought and deed, whereby adhering to the rules of Islam and preserving a strong Islamic identity. The party does not work in the West to change the system of government, but works to project a positive image of Islam to Western society and engages in dialogue with Western thinkers, policymakers and academics." Yet, their actions, tactics, and past antics strongly belie this contention. When I learned of their conference and read its title, it came as no surprise that HT would do such a thing. And it brought to mind that age-old adage: with friends like these, who needs enemies?

The criticism of disrupting Ju'mah khutbahs and ISNA convention sessions is entirely valid (having seen this myself). However that being said, this criticism would ring more true if it were not coming from someone who finds faith and meaning in Christina Aguilera songs:

http://www.altmuslim.com/a/a/a/2299/

This is America, a land where we not only have the liberty to stand up and say something everybody agrees to, but where we have the license to be a scoundrel and stand up and say what is true. And that applies whether one believes that "all sovereignty belongs to God" or that faith and meaning is to be found in song:

Ooh, Baby, do you know what that's worth?
Ooh, Heaven is a place on Earth!
They say in Heaven, Love comes first,
We'll make Heaven a place on Earth!

>>> "In il hukmu illa lillah," or "Verily all sovereignty belongs to God,"

There is the Caliphate as people imagine it to be, and the various caliphates as they existed, fluctuated, warred, governed, assassinated, diversified and harmonised. There was the factionalism and disputes of theologies and philosophies, schools and administrations and classes. And there is the utopian myth of Caliphate as presented by Hizb. People school their Deen in the Utopian and live their lives in the real world, and never shall the twain meet.

>>>> This contrasts sharply with their relative success in other countries across the world, such as the U.K., Denmark, Australia, and even Indonesia, where they attracted 100,000 supporters to a rally in Jakarta.

Don't doubt that your efforts are meaningful because people can attract crowds. Populism, by its nature attracts an insincere type of intention. Indian people have spread through networks across the British commonwealth and are using those networks. If you build sincerely, for the pleasure of Allah SWT, then your work will be protected, regardless of how many adherents that profess loyalty. One person who can sincerely disagree with you is better than a hundred who insincerely support you. Just keep on keeping on ;-)

>>> And it brought to mind that age-old adage: with friends like these, who needs enemies?

WORD!! The dogs of war, the sycophants and misogynists, all calling enthusiastically to the consequences that shaytaan loves, with the turban on the head and tasbeeh in the hand. We have been undone by ourselves.

Kwaleed >>> However that being said, this criticism would ring more true if it were not coming from someone who finds faith and meaning in Christina Aguilera songs:

There is a huge difference between looking for faith and meaning in Christian Aguilera songs, and listening to a song and finding it meaningful. There is a huge difference between listening to the song and evoking notions of pop culture and celebrity vs admitting honestly how you're affected. We live in an environment of dynamic cross-cultural exchange. Its the same reason that Muslims around the world empathise with non-Muslim rebelllions, the death of Michael Jackson, show disdain for the state of boxing but still love and support Muhammad Ali.

The truth isn't more or less of itself because of subjective judgements of the source. Is your comment meant to discredit what he says? Does the fact that he appreciated a Christina Aguilera song somehow make the truths that are presented, less true? Are the questions that he asked now less important?

It's true some HT activists are big on talk, little on action. My experience is that they often lack adab and are short on details. If they had a clue they would know that you can't have Khalifat in a non-Muslim country. Good luck doing dawah while disrespecting your non-Muslim neighbors. At the same time, HT isn't monolithic, many of their activistshave been tortured and killed because of their advocacy for change in banana republics of the Muslim world.
On the other extreme are guys like you Hisham who totally twist and misrepresent the Khalifat. I think your problem is more personal because they probably mopped up the floor with you because you're so wishy washy. Khilafat is the state and government in Islam, not some blurry ill-defined idea which can be co-opted by eager beaver lefties. You have no basis to reject the concept of Khilafat, Muslim independence and unity.

>And that applies whether one believes that "all sovereignty belongs to God" or that faith and meaning is to be found in song:<

Does it also apply to Kosher Meth labs and human organ trafficking rings run by rabbis, solomoan? Is this the "lights of nations" nonsense I keep hearing about? Judeofascists are well known as fifth columns.

>And there is the utopian myth of Caliphate as presented by Hizb.<

Khulafat Rashidden ring a bell? Ahmedis(the community you belong to) are known for their hostility to the Khilafat, which comes as no surprise given that they serve those(the British) played a key role in its destruction.

DrM >>> Khulafat Rashidden ring a bell?

Do you know how our Righteous Caliphs died? That also happens to be maybe forty years of 1400 years of history. If that couldn't be replicated by the tabieen, Salahudeens, Ibn Sinas and Rumis of this world, who is going to get it done now? Utopian, because its built on false notions and consequently offers no real solutions.

>>>> At the same time, HT isn't monolithic, many of their activistshave been tortured and killed because of their advocacy for change in banana republics of the Muslim world.

Absolutely. This Islamic liberation means different things to different people and we need to recognise that the differences exist in views, because of substantive differences on the ground. The Hizb of the US are not the Hizb of Indonesia are not the Taliban of Afghanistan who are not the Tableegh of Deoband etc. Moderates of the US are not the Moderates of Indonesia for example. Those differences must be respected.

>>> Ahmedis(the community you belong to)..

You really are reaching. What is your madhab? Where did you learn your aqeedah? Can you say explicitly what your aqeedah is? How much of Quraan have you memorised? How much time have you spent doing dawaah work? Before you question mine, (despite it having little to do with what we discuss), have the guts and integrity to express your own first. Because I know where I stand very clearly on all of those. From my side, those are rhetorical questions. I couldn't care less about your personal faith because I'm only interested in what you say that's true and relevant.

>Do you know how our Righteous Caliphs died?<

Yeah, and? Does that invalidate their example? So because they were assassinated means the institution of Khilafah is invalid? As usual you don't what you're babbling about. Get offline and read a history book.

>If that couldn't be replicated by the tabieen, Salahudeens, Ibn Sinas and Rumis of this world, who is going to get it done now?<

Another stupid straw man argument based on pure nonsense. Salahudden(military commander), Ibn Sina(father of medicine), Rumi(poet, philosopher) were not Khalifs, nor did they oppose the state and government that was the Khilafah. Despite whatever corruption crept in later the Khilafah was an institution which united Muslims from one corner of the world to another. I've already explained how the destruction fo the Khilafah was engineered by the British in another thread, so I'm not going to repeat it here again.

>What is your madhab?<

Hanafi

>Can you say explicitly what your aqeedah is?<

Sure I can. Prophet Muhammed(saws) stated that it (Al-Iman/faith) is to affirm your faith in Allah, His angels, His Books, His Messengers and the Last Day, and to believe in the Divine Destiny whether it be good or bad." That's what I believe. Notice that your Mirza Ghulam Ahmed is not mention here.

>How much of Quraan have you memorised? <

A decent amount, probably 25% but I'm not a hafiz. Memorization of Qur'an has nothing to do with Aqeedah. You should know this.

>How much time have you spent doing dawaah work?<

Not to brag but a good amount, and I don't add fluff to make it appealing to anyone. Alhamdulilah one of my friends embraced Islam last year at my place. Working on a couple more, but at least they aren't atheists anymore.

>Before you question mine, (despite it having little to do with what we discuss), have the guts and integrity to express your own first.<

I'll definitely question your aqueedah as you have made it clear time and time again that you oppose so many aspects of Islamic theology thought and practice. You're an Ahmedi, and the fact you have defended them in the past and refuse to be crystal clear about your association with them tells me what you're so afraid of revealing to us. Your evasiveness tells me a lot.

The righteous Caliphate stand as exemplars, particularly in Sunni Islam. But I fear people undermine that khilafah is more than the leadership top-down. In reality, it is Muslim society from the bottom up. That society comprised poets, warriors, scientists, philosophers, legists and politicians through long and differing periods in history (hence my examples). The nature of the economy of these societies was in many instances a welfare economy built on waqf, i.e. the Muslim trust contributed to the world at large. That was a major contributor to a coherent fabric of society. All these Muslims and these economies, institutions and mutual understandings are the khilafahs true foundation. But its hardly ever been one consistent space and it certainly did not treat all Muslims the same.

The notion of khilafah as based on the Caliphate so obviously refers to a time when the Ummah was relatively homogenous with cultural uniformity. The character of these men and their teachings serve as guideposts. The Caliphates that arised after that however, co-existed, though not necessarily in mutual respect. Muslim societies existed at once as shia and at once as sunni. The break up in the structures that comprised the differing political heads of the khilafah was as much due to the failings of Muslim civil society as it was the product of invading armies of genghis khan and europeans. Allah SWT only provides us with leaders we deserve. If we don't build the foundations of a strong society, we will never be governed by a good leadership.

My issue with the utopianism is specifically in relation to the article and the nature of hizb and similar movements that are embedded in the identity of broader Muslim society. Hizb in effect wants a religion that centers on khilafah, when the reality is that khilafah is built the other way round. Allah SWT knows best.
..
...
DrM .. Glad to hear all these candid things about you, though i can't imagine such ordinary stories being different for many other people on this site. What you've described are the requirements of Eemaan. They are commonly accepted by different Muslims who profess to differing aqeedahs. The Aqeedah includes these but is not exclusively these. Different creeds have been written by different scholars to varying degrees of complexity and go far beyond what you've described. I asked what dawah work are you involved with. Allah SWT alone places Eemaan in peoples heart. Only 100% can make a person a hafez anyways. My younger brother is a hafez, schooled in a madrassah. Its only after I started working that we had the resources to afford it. So I've memorised what is necessary for my salaah with a little extra for myself. I prefer to study Quraan from the translations. But for the purposes of ibaadat and as I've learnt in madrassah, I prefer to read the arabic. I don't know who Ahmedis are and have never met any. I will not speak about what I don't know. I'm Hanafi too.

I realise now the error in burdening you with the question. I apologise. It creates avenues for all sort of excesses. I also realise the mess in constantly confronting you and how it harms the discussion for other people. I will specifically not confront you any longer to remedy this. Please forgive me for anything I've said in the past that may have hurt you. Khudaahafez.

Does it also apply to Kosher Meth labs and human organ trafficking rings run by rabbis, solomoan?

DrM, you accept the principle that some responsibility for the bad behavior of deviant individuals in a community rests with the community as a whole. Does that apply to Jews and Christians only, or to Muslims as well? This is, after all, what this website is about - not about Jews or Christians, but about Muslims.

> This is, after all, what this website is about - not about Jews or >Christians, but about Muslims.

If that is what it is about (and for) than why are YOU here???

>>> If that is what it is about (and for) than why are YOU here???

I don't want to sound like I'm defending Sol2 but he's arguing a point (a rather weak point at that). BUT, you can't imply he's not allowed to express his opinion here, because he's a Jew.

"And what is the Caliphate, anyway?" Perhaps the author of this article should commit himself to more study, InshaAllah. "Are we really supposed to work for the establishment of a "global Islamic government"?" These are the author's words, not Hizb ut Tahrirs. From the website: "(Hizb ut Tahrir's)objective is to resume the Islamic way of life by establishing an Islamic State that executes the systems of Islam and carries its call to the world." Establish an Islamic state, not a 'global Islamic state'. CALL to the world, not take over the world. It is the obligation of the entire Ummah to establish and uphold Khilafah. Two proofs: (1) Hadith, "The Prophets ruled over the children of Israel, whenever a Prophet died another Prophet succeeded him, but there will be no Prophet after me. There will be Khulafaa' and they will number many.' They asked: ‘What then do you order us?' He said: ‘Fulfil the Bay'ah to them one after the other and give them their due. Surely Allah will ask them about what He entrusted them with.'" (Muslim)
(2) Qur'an, "O you who believe, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from amongst you." (4:59) Many Muslims are seeking to water down the Deen, evidently to please outsiders, but Allah (SWT) knows best, for them, this: "And rule between them by that which Allah revealed to you, and do not follow their vain desires
away from the truth which came to you." (5:48) This is nothing more than what Allah requires, and his Messenger (SAW) has commanded, NOTHING LESS.