The nation-sate is based upon nationalism; modern-day tribalism Its economy & development requires taxation which is against: "You who believe, do not wrongfully consume each other’s wealth but trade by mutual consent." An-Nisa 4 : 29 And the finance system is based upon banking and usury
It is wonderful to hear someone whose mind inspires our mind to think about what we read and how we then choose to perceive it. Thank you, Brother Shahid; your channel is, as always, thought-provoking.
Me too. I have been contemplating and trying to process the concept of the nation-state as defined by Fredy Perlman in “The Continuing Appeal of Nationalism,” and an Islamic perspective on it.
I don’t think he gave justice to wael hallaq ideas … modernity is not only kuffer because muslims countries now and individuals are consumed by modernity thats Wael hallaq idea … Modernity is effecting all human race spirituality religions and the environment .. he didn’t understand the book and tries to over-simplify it …
@@Ibnwhitetrashabdullah Interesting, haven't heard of this book. I have a lot of white folks as friends on twitter and we discuss some of these ideas so I've been looking for something that has an Islamic perspective on Nationalism... Is there someone that did analyze that book from said perspective?
The question is how to have leaders like Omar Bin AbdulAziz in power more often than not. We need a system to groom such leaders, to favour only them in authority positions, to secure them there for some time, and to empower them to theorize and implement their visions. This is what we always needed and at this we always failed. Do your best to start such endeavour and your contribution will be the most appreciated in Islamic and human history.
The way I was "educated" about Umar Ibn Abd Aziz (UAA) and Muhammad Al-fateh (MaF) feels secular now that I listen to middle nation and discussion about Prof Wael Hallaq books. It is as if that UAA and MAF exist in vacuum, with no prior structure before both of them.
@@annurraudhah This is exactly my point Omar Bin AbdulAziz came to power by freak unrepeatable accident, had limited support, had his life threatened and taken very soon, and he did not have a full chance to theorize and implement his vision. WE DISPRATELY NEED A SYSTEM TO PRODUCE CONSISTENT RESULTS WHICH BUILDS UP MOMENTUM IN THE POSITIVE DIRECTION.
It is a really good take. This take from Ustadh Shahid holds more value than many other vids explaining wael hallaq's books and thoughts, because he takes the discussion one step further. However Ustadh shahid undermines the effect of what he dismisses as political islam in muslim world. I'll practice a lot more caution in saying that governmental system, or models, have not had any effect on Muslims or Islam in the Muslim lands. And his own assessment of political Islam proves the point. This was born out of colonization and reaction to it, as Ustadh shahid himself says. To dissuade the muslims from falling into it (which they have en masse all over the globe), the implausibiliy of modern state in its current form being amenable to Islam (the pre-colonization form) by simply populating them with Muslims (that's what political Islam proposes as well in essence) needs to be underlined and that's what hallaq did so well (from what little I read/learned about him). Another way to put it will be like this - if a modern state truly does get populated with Muslims who rules by Islam, the state system will get changed in such a drastic way that will have to be recognized as a different entity to what we know as current modern nation state. The fact that that has not happened, despite there being so many Islamic nation state today, shows that just populating the state apparatus with Muslim ppl is not enough. A bank will not suddenly become 'Islamic' if all its posts were filled in by Muslims, a brothel will not become 'Islamic' if all its prostitutes and customers are Muslims. That's where Hallaq's input is valuable. However he's not what he is not (i.e. Islamic take on the malaise of modernity) and recognizing that is important as well - that's where I think this interview holds value.
A lot of your takes are spot on. This topic might be your only glaring weakness / misunderstanding. I say this as Naseeha, not to berate. The model is not arbitrary. The model was informed by kufr. The state can’t exist without banking, which is forbidden. From that comes the fraudulent entities of the corporation and stock market. Uppity workers angry at their plight and the desire for docile citizens starts the mass education system. You can’t transplant that model onto the Muslim lands because these institutions and models are incompatible with the sharia that Allah SWT has commanded us to follow. You seem to get it sometimes when you criticise western institutions but somehow are lax when it’s Muslims doing the same thing. The reason why Muslims criticise Arab / Muslim countries is that they should know better than the west. We take is as given that the model of the West is evil, which is why it is more painful for us that Muslims who know the truth are following the same model which is in disobedience to our Maker. Why are there banks in Muslim lands, or fraudulent fiat money, or stock markets, or corporations, or mass education systems, or any number of things which are forbidden. If you unravel our institutions baked in sin then the state itself unravels. The state in itself is a totalitarian and evil institution. Think if the Sahaba would recognise anything we are doing as Islam. Let’s not judge ourselves by the standard of using systems of kufr in a less evil way than the kuffar, because not only is that a low standard, but also a fake self made standard which has nothing to do with the Deen of Allah SWT. If we were sincere, we would realise that we need to change as an Ummah. Faith is inseparable from practice and what we practice is determined by law, and that law can’t be anything other than the shariah. Our institutions and governance must be subordinate to the sharia. You have influence, so it would be good for you to propagate this message and hopefully be part of the solution this Ummah needs.
Thanks for the time an effort brother. I haven't read the book and only stumbled opun this video. Your comment motivated me to go read the book and I find your opinion very wise and sincere
@@MiddleNation I’m not. Their solutions seem simplistic. What I’m baffled by is that you don’t even see that there’s a problem in the first place. You think the model is entirely irrelevant when it is clearly based on sin? Bizarre take as it’s so out line with everything else you say. I’m not sure what’s making you think this way.
I love your videos Shahid, but you really don’t need the distraction of the background noise in the coffee shop. we enjoy listening to you without any other disturbances. in my opinion, you don’t even need the coffee idea but if you choose to keep it, keep the picture of the coffee; sip on some coffee in a quiet place with no background noise. Just my opinion, because truthfully these ☕️videos have been hard for me to watch all the way through.
@@NotesfromtheFuturesPast- worse, I sent him some peer reviewed literature which exposed his thesis on the Shari'ah and all he could respond back with was "crap".
The Western nation state model is really a product of the 1600s and more specifically the 30 Years War where Protestant rebels fought Imperial Catholic monarchs, leading to a stalemate where the power of local rulers was given priority over religious authorities. It is a secular concept which implies that religion is ultimately not very important, and this is why it didn't come from the Muslim world and doesn't translate well to Muslim societies.
The book is a top down analysis of gov rather than a bottom up, which is what's historically been true of how muslim states have behaved. Goes to show how colonized even some muslim intellectuals are.
17:25 “he can’t say what the real problem is and what the real solution is” That was a good one 😂 and I must say I thought about it too. One must also admit he must have strong debilitating? ties at both personal and professional levels. To his credit, he has also given a practical way out at the end of his book.
Hallaq's argument is about construction of self in a top down legality based ammoral system of governance. In any top down rule driven system , he showed that there would be inevitably pychoepistemic disorders. Nationalistic jingoism, alieantion etc, territory occupation as it is based on brute power divorced from any moral consideration. He says it wouldn't make any difference in outcomes in the context of identity and self of a subject, as long as it is top down. Islamic governance is by its very essence is bottom up and adaptive. It doesn't and cannot enforce something on global scale. It works in a case by case. It takes into account of the fact that local issues can only be dealt locally by people who is most close to it. More the distance less effective it becomes. Since Islamic governance is necessarily bottom up i.e sharia , any attempt of creating a Islamic state( top down passport issuing )is inconsistent with Islam. I read the book 4 yreas ago. One of the most memorable experience. I hope the host familiarise himself with his work. It seems he probably just overheard a second hand account from someone who probably only read the preface.
You misunderstood hallaq's point. He doesn't accuse the nation state for everything, he accuses the ideology of modernity. His book Restating Modernity go in more details for that.Accusing kufr for everything is not the best explanation. Kufr existed for centuries but why no kafir society behaved like the west did? Why didn't the chineses or the indians try to colonise the world and "civilise" them? In his book restating orientalism he accused the ideology of modernity. The modern state is an invention of the ideology of modernity. Never in history did we see a state like that, it is a new one. That's why hallaq believe that it is not compatible with islam since this state came from a certain ideology(kufr) and had for goal to serve it. He talks a lot about the excessive centralisation of the modern state which is a thing that never happenned in traditional islamic societies historically.
There is no reason to believe that kufr manifests the same way everywhere with every people, Allah referred to Islam as Light, and kufr as Darknesses -- in the plural. The kufr of the West has manifested in a very consistent way for a very, very long time, in a way unique to them; and they have not changed from ancient times to now
@@MiddleNation ''The kufr of the West has manifested in a very consistent way for a very, very long time, in a way unique to them; and they have not changed from ancient times to now'' That may be the fundamental difference between you and Hallaq. He believes that modernity has many continuations from Christianity but its kufr has also many differences. Hallaq focus on the differences because he wants to understand why the modern period has many differences from the premodern one. Why didn't we see a centralisation of the state in the premoden period like the one nowadays for example? Why ancient europeans, Chineses, indians and Muslims did not interact with the people that they subjected in the same way that modern Europe did? Modernity has adherants not only in the west but in every country in the world. I advise you to read his books because I believe that you did not completely grab his thought which is mainly an argument in the philosophy of history. ''Restating orientalism'' is an excellent book to understand his argument.
Good discussion. This makes me think of Alexander Dugin's criticism of liberalism or modernity/post-modernity ("liberalism has won" - we are living in the era of "post-liberalist victory") and the "destiny of man" as man as the "political man". The whole geo-political economy shapes the whole conditions of man, people everywhere (living wherever they live in their respective nation-states) but yes, the whole cultural history is also still hugely important but at the more forefront is the homogenizing forces of capital and globalist capitalism and the whole U.S. cultural ideological diminuitive domination ambitive or subversive ambitions (not sure if my words are correct or as precise as I want them to be here but I hope one could understand the point am trying to make). It is not like "the system" requires full compliance to still influence subversively and work its way into all places of the world...
Would not Marxist-like ("true") communism be necessary or nearly necessary (that is, the diminishment of centralizing and/or monopolizing powers and of the centralization of power within the nation-state and capitalist corporations) in order for humanity to evolve past this current episteme of affairs (the nation state geopolitical economic model) maybe? Potentially? The Prophet Muhammad S.A.W. said I have come for all of humanity and Islam is the true religion of Allah S.W.T. no matter what anyone else believes or any one of us' individual actions, the religion of Allah S.W.T. is (the true religion). All of the heavens and the earth belong to Allah, not any man and in the Shariah isn't it a right for individuals to be able to migrate or travel on the earth freely? And we are not to just be like divided by our tribalism, so our nationalism, or even our religions, but ís incumbent upon the believer to treat all of Allah's servants/slaves kindly and with respect? To uh, be kind to your neighbor even on a day of hardship and struggle, not to divide and just be in a continual competition with others like in the capitalist dog eat dog, every man for himself type of episteme inherent in the current mode of unbridled capitalism... hmm. But it's not to say that, Islam is all political, or that anyone anywhere need be all political and whatnot and we need to impose our beliefs on everyone else, but I think people should be free to atleast degrees, in important ways, not to impose and make it incumbent upon people or any person to force them to believe and adhere to certain things - this is wrong and I do not accept it, that is like the whole CBDC and dajjalic system of total control over people, Orwellian-like totalitarianism and authoritarianism. barring diminuation of the
Salam brother Shaihd First, I’d like to thank you for your efforts in talking and addressing hard complicated issues. Secondly, unfortunately this video lack the background and the context for many to benefit from it. I would like to suggest to make a long comprehensive video about this topic in order to gain a better understanding about Wael ‘s position and your critiques about him
Brother Shahid, your position is similar to the position held by Cheikh Ali Abdel Raziq in his 1925 book "Islam and the Foundations of Governance" where he held that a caliphate is not a religious necessity and that other forms of political models and institutions are acceptable. Translated quote : "Islam does not advocate a specific form of government". That has always been a position held by a minority of scholars as far as I know. The majority still hold to the Caliphate is a religious necessity argument even if we obviously would require an updated version as we cannot function in 1445 as we did in 45 or 445. Are you aware of that book and that you defend a view that is in the minority? I don't have your knowledge or of those that hold the majority position, I just wanted to bring that up. JazakAllahou khair
Thank you. I have a greater appreciation of the importance of the separation of church and state. Religion should help to temper the so called freedoms of the west. Are you considering a model that recognizes a single spiritual leader? If the West had Khilafah and accepted his guidance Kuffar would be called what it is, and good would become distinct from bad and righteousness would become a part of that which is modeled. Then again.. ““Freedom “ is only a victory for the first to claim unbridled liberation.The limits it would have otherwise imposed are lost in the celebration. When left untreated with morals or religion, freedom metastasizes until it imprisons the body politic that permitted it. America is enjoying Stage 4 Freedoms. “
Model does matter, cause muslim countries with sharia law have vey low crime, others without sharia got similar problem as west , high crine, sexual assault ec
Shahid is really dragging the book without reading it or understanding the core arguments at all. He goes on and on about the lack of tawhid being the problem, EVEN THOUGH this is mentioned in the book in much more detail and specificity than Shahid does
You expose yourself in this video very clearly - as it shows you dont know political theory, sociology basic and the effect of systems upon individuals and society. Also Thou am not a follower of Hallaq - you are miss-representing his works. His refutation isnt only the model - this is not even a side point he make its totally off the mark.
@MiddleNation sir if i am not mistaken i watched a video where you compared brics Member organisations to what was the the khilafa back in the day, a series of countries with common interest and a defined line of opoeration and compliance so you admit in a way that a government model have influence. To me it seems like a very abstract topic. Another thing, it's a fact that democracy was founded by the private sector to create a new class that would lead to a control of the government by the private sector, now coporations float over the empire with no borders etc.. but you also state that state ation must he strong and not engage in separantism to the unmah to be able to coerce, negotiate and face the threat of corporations. So in a way you say that capitalism is bad and would lead to a kufr goverment and system that is imperialist in nature with profit as ultimate objective amd this is a model a social economic model that HAVE impact on people more that collective iman of the whole world. I think you want to imply that an anarco-communist is the solution which see the model itself and the economic coercion as the two factor to alinate from society. And Allah knows best. ( I'm a huge fan of you byw)
Nation state model has impacted productivity from the religiousity. Islamic movements are bandaid and bandaged solutions within the Nation State. So we beg to disagree. Read Hallaq's Introduction to Islamic Law. We break it down to the Why. People are affected by models once the state has destroyed the NECESSARY means of empowering societies such as Awqaf and other sources of empowerment beyond taxes. Yes Kufr is important if not primary not with a negligence of the state model that has hampered traditional societies ESPECIALLY in West Africa.
Assalamu Aleykom, king! Muslims would be better off if they read the books of Ibn Tayymiyah (rahimahullah). I never understood those new age scholars and imams.
Imaam Ahmad, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Katheer, al-Barbaharee, Ibn Qayyim, Ibn Abdil Wahhab, Ibn Baaz, al-Albaanee, Ibn Uthaymin and those who were upon what they were upon. Rahimahumullaah.
How deviated this analysis is. His whole argument that the system isn’t a problem but the fact that they are kuffar. Then he speaks that actually the system of governance doesn’t matter it is actually the private sector. As if the current private sector isn’t the result of the nation state (you can argue the state is the result of the capitalistic economy/private sector) but either cases it facilitates its function and the private sector wouldn’t be this power if it wasn’t for the nation state. Second he states that nation state isn’t a problem for muslims as it doesn’t define who they are rather we would stay muslims under any circumstances, this disregards the main point hallak points which is even if you are a muslim you can’t be fully muslim in a nation state because you are not fulfilling the shahada that there no god but allah, instead we are worshiping the state itself (even if we acknowledge it or not) and all nation states nowadays are created by western power, along with their constitution. So we are not worshiping a state that has the sharia as their main source of legislation (which would make it be less bad- if this is doable in the first place) but a nation state that everything inside of it the creation of the west.
I think Shahid Bolsen is wrong: Wael Hallaq, a prominent scholar in Islamic law and legal theory, critiques the nation-state model from a perspective informed by Islamic jurisprudence and historical analysis. He argues that the nation-state, as it emerged in the post-colonial world, often imposes Western-centric norms and structures that do not necessarily align with the diverse cultural, religious, and historical contexts of many regions, including the Middle East. Hallaq's critique includes: 1. **Imposition of Western norms**: He argues that the nation-state model, largely derived from European experiences, is often imposed on societies without considering their unique historical, cultural, and religious backgrounds. 2. **Artificial borders**: Hallaq criticizes the arbitrary drawing of borders by colonial powers, which often divided ethnic, religious, and linguistic groups, leading to conflicts and instability. 3. **Secularism and centralization**: He critiques the secular nature of nation-states, which may conflict with religious values and traditions in many societies. Additionally, the centralization of power in the nation-state model can marginalize local communities and their traditional governance structures. 4. **Failure to accommodate pluralism**: Hallaq argues that the nation-state model often fails to accommodate the diverse religious, ethnic, and cultural identities within its borders, leading to marginalization and conflicts. 5. **Limited legitimacy**: He questions the legitimacy of nation-states in regions where colonialism imposed them, arguing that they often lack genuine popular support and legitimacy. Overall, Hallaq's critique underscores the need for alternative political models that are more inclusive, culturally sensitive, and compatible with the diverse realities of societies, particularly in the Middle East and other post-colonial regions.
@thewhitemoor - Wael Hallaq is a Christian Arab so how on earth can he be correct given his partial understanding of Islam? Shahid Bolsen at least makes the incisive observation that Islam is about correctly comprehending reality which Hallaq as a non-Muslim cannot do. Think about it this way (which is what Bolsen is arguing), even with the restrictions apparent from adopting the nation state model how does that prevent Muslims from operating the system according to Islam? Is it impossible for a system of justice to be established? What about transparency, accountability and consultation? How does the nation state model prevent Muslims from effecting these Qur'anic imperatives? That is why Hallaq's thesis is problematic.
Was hoping for a nuanced, intellectual and educational discussion, ended up with demagoguery, name calling, superficial analysis and many base-less opinions!! You can do better than this, for such an important subject, or just leave it be.
@@MiddleNation You can do better than this brother Shahid, I know you can. I've been following you for almost a year now and have watched dozens of hours of your videos where you have come up with some real gems, Jazaka Allahu Khayran. But, this is not it, this style of attacking the holders of certain ideas and assuming intentions and/or motivations is not productive and, dare I say, not aligned with Islamic intellectual spirit. You are at your best when you focus on the abstract idea itself and ignoring the supposed personality behind it. May Allah guide us all to his righteous path.
With all due respect, i do not think you understood his analysis or argument well. Please refrain from giving opinions on subjects out of your knowledge, otherwise, you would be spreading bad seeds in people
It seems as if you have severely misunderstood Hallaq's ideas. It's unfair to publish such a video without completing the book in the first place (at least that's the impression I'm getting through this vid).
Nice point of view ,but dr hallaq was misunderstood, he thinks that Islamic movements and politics in these decade in islamic country trying to fit in moderne state model have no sense, thats the core subject so he is calling for a new model to fit with Islamic chariaa and not the khilafa
Love your channel, and I'm a member. But you're constantly speaking in a vacuum. It would be great to get WH (shouldn't be hard) and others you disagree with (Sami Hamdi for example) on to discuss your points in length.
This is such a shallow analysis. Shahid talks in circles and ends up essentially making Wael's points over and over again whilst misunderstanding the very context of the discussion. It's like a guy walking into a room and rehashing points in the discussion that have already been acknowledged. Yes. We know HT are clowns. Now please stop behaving is such a shallow and tribal manner.
I respectfully disagree with Shahid on this one. Firstly the premise is all wrong. Sovereignty of the Sharia is a condition to be a Muslim in the first place. The nation state is Sovereignty of the regime over anything else including the Sharia. Secondly the Sharia addresses essential elements of Human experience and condition such as Social structures and institutions, the Economic system and the very basis for the Islamic Politics itself. Thirdly the Quran. is the constitution of Islam and the Sunna is itself details with the Hadiths and the archives of the Sahaba and those who succeeded them, and the legacy of Fiqh jurisprudence of the Madhabs along with Ijtihad. Fourthly there must be a means of mutual consultion between the the rulers and the Ulema to guide the affairs of the country. Fifthly the citizens must be in an environment that has the signs of Islam known by common sense, and a spirit solidarity must be promoted based on Islamic brotherhood and not Patriotism to the state identity, and the people must be groomed to protect this state of Islam in idea ,in support and in military action for the sake of Allah. Loyalty to Allah,His Rasul and the Din of Islam requires being disavowed from Shirk , Kufr and the modern plagues of Liberalism, Secularism and the Usury of Capitalism that has bled Humanity dry . This is a tall order but we must stop settling for substandards and defeatist ideologies that continue to weaken the Umma.
@@briancordero7674 I'm not talking about those. You're acting as if any other alternative political model than your idea of an 'islamic state' will make it impossible for the ummah to improve, which makes no sense.
Are you sure everything desirable came into the world in the 7th century? Maybe the best aspects of Islam are actually vestiges from Arab paganism and not products of religious innovation.
![30 ชั่วโมงคนเดียว บนรถไฟชั้น 3 โซเวียต [Around The World Ep. 2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/MlE9boAVqDA/mqdefault.jpg)
Salam. I love the way Brother Shahid explains everything so simply that everyone with a functional brain should be able to understand.👍🕋💯🌟💚
MashaAllah Thank you Shahid. You enlightened us with your brilliant perspectives 👏👏👏👏👏👏 Free Free Palestine !
The nation-sate is based upon nationalism; modern-day tribalism
Its economy & development requires taxation which is against:
"You who believe, do not wrongfully consume each other’s wealth but trade by mutual consent." An-Nisa 4 : 29
And the finance system is based upon banking and usury
It is wonderful to hear someone whose mind inspires our mind to think about what we read and how we then choose to perceive it. Thank you, Brother Shahid; your channel is, as always, thought-provoking.
Mashallah. Always feel enlightened.
أصلح بك الله البلاد و العباد
Thanks for sharing
I love going to the gym and working out while listening to this brother.
I am so happy this book is being discussed
Me too. I have been contemplating and trying to process the concept of the nation-state as defined by Fredy Perlman in “The Continuing Appeal of Nationalism,” and an Islamic perspective on it.
I don’t think he gave justice to wael hallaq ideas … modernity is not only kuffer because muslims countries now and individuals are consumed by modernity thats Wael hallaq idea … Modernity is effecting all human race spirituality religions and the environment ..
he didn’t understand the book and tries to over-simplify it …
@@Supe204 Agreed with you. It was a facile generalization of Hallaq's view imo. And yes the nation-state is diametrically opposed to Islam.
@@Ibnwhitetrashabdullah Interesting, haven't heard of this book. I have a lot of white folks as friends on twitter and we discuss some of these ideas so I've been looking for something that has an Islamic perspective on Nationalism... Is there someone that did analyze that book from said perspective?
The question is how to have leaders like Omar Bin AbdulAziz in power more often than not. We need a system to groom such leaders, to favour only them in authority positions, to secure them there for some time, and to empower them to theorize and implement their visions. This is what we always needed and at this we always failed. Do your best to start such endeavour and your contribution will be the most appreciated in Islamic and human history.
The way I was "educated" about Umar Ibn Abd Aziz (UAA) and Muhammad Al-fateh (MaF) feels secular now that I listen to middle nation and discussion about Prof Wael Hallaq books.
It is as if that UAA and MAF exist in vacuum, with no prior structure before both of them.
@@annurraudhah This is exactly my point Omar Bin AbdulAziz came to power by freak unrepeatable accident, had limited support, had his life threatened and taken very soon, and he did not have a full chance to theorize and implement his vision.
WE DISPRATELY NEED A SYSTEM TO PRODUCE CONSISTENT RESULTS WHICH BUILDS UP MOMENTUM IN THE POSITIVE DIRECTION.
The thing is leaders like Omar ibn Abdulaziz existed only once back then, if they were that rare back then, what do u expect today?
It is a really good take. This take from Ustadh Shahid holds more value than many other vids explaining wael hallaq's books and thoughts, because he takes the discussion one step further. However Ustadh shahid undermines the effect of what he dismisses as political islam in muslim world. I'll practice a lot more caution in saying that governmental system, or models, have not had any effect on Muslims or Islam in the Muslim lands. And his own assessment of political Islam proves the point. This was born out of colonization and reaction to it, as Ustadh shahid himself says. To dissuade the muslims from falling into it (which they have en masse all over the globe), the implausibiliy of modern state in its current form being amenable to Islam (the pre-colonization form) by simply populating them with Muslims (that's what political Islam proposes as well in essence) needs to be underlined and that's what hallaq did so well (from what little I read/learned about him). Another way to put it will be like this - if a modern state truly does get populated with Muslims who rules by Islam, the state system will get changed in such a drastic way that will have to be recognized as a different entity to what we know as current modern nation state. The fact that that has not happened, despite there being so many Islamic nation state today, shows that just populating the state apparatus with Muslim ppl is not enough. A bank will not suddenly become 'Islamic' if all its posts were filled in by Muslims, a brothel will not become 'Islamic' if all its prostitutes and customers are Muslims. That's where Hallaq's input is valuable. However he's not what he is not (i.e. Islamic take on the malaise of modernity) and recognizing that is important as well - that's where I think this interview holds value.
A lot of your takes are spot on. This topic might be your only glaring weakness / misunderstanding. I say this as Naseeha, not to berate. The model is not arbitrary. The model was informed by kufr. The state can’t exist without banking, which is forbidden. From that comes the fraudulent entities of the corporation and stock market. Uppity workers angry at their plight and the desire for docile citizens starts the mass education system. You can’t transplant that model onto the Muslim lands because these institutions and models are incompatible with the sharia that Allah SWT has commanded us to follow. You seem to get it sometimes when you criticise western institutions but somehow are lax when it’s Muslims doing the same thing. The reason why Muslims criticise Arab / Muslim countries is that they should know better than the west. We take is as given that the model of the West is evil, which is why it is more painful for us that Muslims who know the truth are following the same model which is in disobedience to our Maker. Why are there banks in Muslim lands, or fraudulent fiat money, or stock markets, or corporations, or mass education systems, or any number of things which are forbidden. If you unravel our institutions baked in sin then the state itself unravels. The state in itself is a totalitarian and evil institution. Think if the Sahaba would recognise anything we are doing as Islam. Let’s not judge ourselves by the standard of using systems of kufr in a less evil way than the kuffar, because not only is that a low standard, but also a fake self made standard which has nothing to do with the Deen of Allah SWT. If we were sincere, we would realise that we need to change as an Ummah. Faith is inseparable from practice and what we practice is determined by law, and that law can’t be anything other than the shariah. Our institutions and governance must be subordinate to the sharia. You have influence, so it would be good for you to propagate this message and hopefully be part of the solution this Ummah needs.
Thanks for the time an effort brother.
I haven't read the book and only stumbled opun this video.
Your comment motivated me to go read the book and I find your opinion very wise and sincere
Very well articulated.
You seem to be HT
@@MiddleNation I’m not. Their solutions seem simplistic. What I’m baffled by is that you don’t even see that there’s a problem in the first place. You think the model is entirely irrelevant when it is clearly based on sin? Bizarre take as it’s so out line with everything else you say. I’m not sure what’s making you think this way.
@@Fungiii11 No problem, I haven’t the read the book as a disclaimer. I already held these views.
We need a similar analysis of "Intellectual Intifada" by Shaykh Asrar Rashid too.
2:49
Perfect point!
Sir, ... Alhamdulillah. Brilliant ideas. Much ❤.
In 2016 Dr. Hoda published her book ( Rizum) which was a message from Mary Mother of Jesus who invited people to Islam.
I love your videos Shahid, but you really don’t need the distraction of the background noise in the coffee shop. we enjoy listening to you without any other disturbances. in my opinion, you don’t even need the coffee idea but if you choose to keep it, keep the picture of the coffee; sip on some coffee in a quiet place with no background noise. Just my opinion, because truthfully these ☕️videos have been hard for me to watch all the way through.
Learned about Hallaq through BT podcast with Tom Facchine. Didn't realize the author was not muslim. This take is healthy criticism
@@NotesfromtheFuturesPast- worse, I sent him some peer reviewed literature which exposed his thesis on the Shari'ah and all he could respond back with was "crap".
Just think of the Andalus. They had a Caliphate, didn't stop the mass population from declaring war on them and starting the spanish inquisition.
What history are we reading here? 700 of Andalus caliphate?
Allahumma Aameen for Free Falasteen Islam isthe only chice for peace and justice follow the commands exactly Aameen YARABB
The Western nation state model is really a product of the 1600s and more specifically the 30 Years War where Protestant rebels fought Imperial Catholic monarchs, leading to a stalemate where the power of local rulers was given priority over religious authorities. It is a secular concept which implies that religion is ultimately not very important, and this is why it didn't come from the Muslim world and doesn't translate well to Muslim societies.
The book is a top down analysis of gov rather than a bottom up, which is what's historically been true of how muslim states have behaved.
Goes to show how colonized even some muslim intellectuals are.
he's not muslim, he's an arab palestinian christian
17:25 “he can’t say what the real problem is and what the real solution is”
That was a good one 😂 and I must say I thought about it too. One must also admit he must have strong debilitating? ties at both personal and professional levels.
To his credit, he has also given a practical way out at the end of his book.
Hallaq's argument is about construction of self in a top down legality based ammoral system of governance. In any top down rule driven system , he showed that there would be inevitably pychoepistemic disorders. Nationalistic jingoism, alieantion etc, territory occupation as it is based on brute power divorced from any moral consideration. He says it wouldn't make any difference in outcomes in the context of identity and self of a subject, as long as it is top down. Islamic governance is by its very essence is bottom up and adaptive. It doesn't and cannot enforce something on global scale. It works in a case by case. It takes into account of the fact that local issues can only be dealt locally by people who is most close to it. More the distance less effective it becomes. Since Islamic governance is necessarily bottom up i.e sharia , any attempt of creating a Islamic state( top down passport issuing )is inconsistent with Islam. I read the book 4 yreas ago. One of the most memorable experience. I hope the host familiarise himself with his work. It seems he probably just overheard a second hand account from someone who probably only read the preface.
You misunderstood hallaq's point. He doesn't accuse the nation state for everything, he accuses the ideology of modernity. His book Restating Modernity go in more details for that.Accusing kufr for everything is not the best explanation. Kufr existed for centuries but why no kafir society behaved like the west did? Why didn't the chineses or the indians try to colonise the world and "civilise" them? In his book restating orientalism he accused the ideology of modernity. The modern state is an invention of the ideology of modernity. Never in history did we see a state like that, it is a new one. That's why hallaq believe that it is not compatible with islam since this state came from a certain ideology(kufr) and had for goal to serve it. He talks a lot about the excessive centralisation of the modern state which is a thing that never happenned in traditional islamic societies historically.
There is no reason to believe that kufr manifests the same way everywhere with every people, Allah referred to Islam as Light, and kufr as Darknesses -- in the plural. The kufr of the West has manifested in a very consistent way for a very, very long time, in a way unique to them; and they have not changed from ancient times to now
@@MiddleNation
''The kufr of the West has manifested in a very consistent way for a very, very long time, in a way unique to them; and they have not changed from ancient times to now''
That may be the fundamental difference between you and Hallaq. He believes that modernity has many continuations from Christianity but its kufr has also many differences. Hallaq focus on the differences because he wants to understand why the modern period has many differences from the premodern one. Why didn't we see a centralisation of the state in the premoden period like the one nowadays for example? Why ancient europeans, Chineses, indians and Muslims did not interact with the people that they subjected in the same way that modern Europe did? Modernity has adherants not only in the west but in every country in the world. I advise you to read his books because I believe that you did not completely grab his thought which is mainly an argument in the philosophy of history. ''Restating orientalism'' is an excellent book to understand his argument.
Good discussion. This makes me think of Alexander Dugin's criticism of liberalism or modernity/post-modernity ("liberalism has won" - we are living in the era of "post-liberalist victory") and the "destiny of man" as man as the "political man". The whole geo-political economy shapes the whole conditions of man, people everywhere (living wherever they live in their respective nation-states) but yes, the whole cultural history is also still hugely important but at the more forefront is the homogenizing forces of capital and globalist capitalism and the whole U.S. cultural ideological diminuitive domination ambitive or subversive ambitions (not sure if my words are correct or as precise as I want them to be here but I hope one could understand the point am trying to make). It is not like "the system" requires full compliance to still influence subversively and work its way into all places of the world...
Would not Marxist-like ("true") communism be necessary or nearly necessary (that is, the diminishment of centralizing and/or monopolizing powers and of the centralization of power within the nation-state and capitalist corporations) in order for humanity to evolve past this current episteme of affairs (the nation state geopolitical economic model) maybe? Potentially? The Prophet Muhammad S.A.W. said I have come for all of humanity and Islam is the true religion of Allah S.W.T. no matter what anyone else believes or any one of us' individual actions, the religion of Allah S.W.T. is (the true religion). All of the heavens and the earth belong to Allah, not any man and in the Shariah isn't it a right for individuals to be able to migrate or travel on the earth freely? And we are not to just be like divided by our tribalism, so our nationalism, or even our religions, but ís incumbent upon the believer to treat all of Allah's servants/slaves kindly and with respect? To uh, be kind to your neighbor even on a day of hardship and struggle, not to divide and just be in a continual competition with others like in the capitalist dog eat dog, every man for himself type of episteme inherent in the current mode of unbridled capitalism... hmm. But it's not to say that, Islam is all political, or that anyone anywhere need be all political and whatnot and we need to impose our beliefs on everyone else, but I think people should be free to atleast degrees, in important ways, not to impose and make it incumbent upon people or any person to force them to believe and adhere to certain things - this is wrong and I do not accept it, that is like the whole CBDC and dajjalic system of total control over people, Orwellian-like totalitarianism and authoritarianism.
barring diminuation of the
Salam brother Shaihd
First, I’d like to thank you for your efforts in talking and addressing hard complicated issues.
Secondly, unfortunately this video lack the background and the context for many to benefit from it. I would like to suggest to make a long comprehensive video about this topic in order to gain a better understanding about Wael ‘s position and your critiques about him
Brother Shahid, your position is similar to the position held by Cheikh Ali Abdel Raziq in his 1925 book "Islam and the Foundations of Governance" where he held that a caliphate is not a religious necessity and that other forms of political models and institutions are acceptable. Translated quote : "Islam does not advocate a specific form of government". That has always been a position held by a minority of scholars as far as I know. The majority still hold to the Caliphate is a religious necessity argument even if we obviously would require an updated version as we cannot function in 1445 as we did in 45 or 445. Are you aware of that book and that you defend a view that is in the minority? I don't have your knowledge or of those that hold the majority position, I just wanted to bring that up. JazakAllahou khair
Prof. Abou el Fadl holds this position too.
Thank you. I have a greater appreciation of the importance of the separation of church and state. Religion should help to temper the so called freedoms of the west.
Are you considering a model that recognizes a single spiritual leader? If the West had Khilafah and accepted his guidance Kuffar would be called what it is, and good would become distinct from bad and righteousness would become a part of that which is modeled.
Then again..
““Freedom “ is only a victory for the first to claim unbridled liberation.The limits it would have otherwise imposed are lost in the celebration. When left untreated with morals or religion, freedom metastasizes until it imprisons the body politic that permitted it. America is enjoying Stage 4 Freedoms. “
❤❤❤❤❤
Anarchy in Spain ( Catalonia ) showed that the West does have another way it can go.
Model does matter, cause muslim countries with sharia law have vey low crime, others without sharia got similar problem as west , high crine, sexual assault ec
Which Muslim country is NOT a nation-state?
@@MiddleNationgood point
Shahid is really dragging the book without reading it or understanding the core arguments at all. He goes on and on about the lack of tawhid being the problem, EVEN THOUGH this is mentioned in the book in much more detail and specificity than Shahid does
Exactly and Hallaq discusses the specific ways in which both a Statist legal system and the nation-state itself hinder tawhid.
He has never read the book, he only watched an interview allegedly.
What're the core arguments?
if the interview fails to mention the CORE problem and you have to dig in the book to find it, then it was not an effective interview
Why do I feel as though I’m listening to Malcolm X?
👍👍
In the west we are very much effected every day. This is how we got here.
You expose yourself in this video very clearly - as it shows you dont know political theory, sociology basic and the effect of systems upon individuals and society. Also Thou am not a follower of Hallaq - you are miss-representing his works. His refutation isnt only the model - this is not even a side point he make its totally off the mark.
@MiddleNation sir if i am not mistaken i watched a video where you compared brics Member organisations to what was the the khilafa back in the day, a series of countries with common interest and a defined line of opoeration and compliance so you admit in a way that a government model have influence. To me it seems like a very abstract topic. Another thing, it's a fact that democracy was founded by the private sector to create a new class that would lead to a control of the government by the private sector, now coporations float over the empire with no borders etc.. but you also state that state
ation must he strong and not engage in separantism to the unmah to be able to coerce, negotiate and face the threat of corporations. So in a way you say that capitalism is bad and would lead to a kufr goverment and system that is imperialist in nature with profit as ultimate objective amd this is a model a social economic model that HAVE impact on people more that collective iman of the whole world. I think you want to imply that an anarco-communist is the solution which see the model itself and the economic coercion as the two factor to alinate from society. And Allah knows best. ( I'm a huge fan of you byw)
Sir what are your views on Khilafah ???
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Nation state model has impacted productivity from the religiousity.
Islamic movements are bandaid and bandaged solutions within the Nation State.
So we beg to disagree. Read Hallaq's Introduction to Islamic Law. We break it down to the Why.
People are affected by models once the state has destroyed the NECESSARY means of empowering societies such as Awqaf and other sources of empowerment beyond taxes.
Yes Kufr is important if not primary not with a negligence of the state model that has hampered traditional societies ESPECIALLY in West Africa.
Awqafs still exist in most Muslim countries
💙💙
Justice group what is action related general scientist in attacks in death condition
Please do your best to debate Wael Hallaq so both of you find common grounds where the truth is actually there.
Assalamu Aleykom, king! Muslims would be better off if they read the books of Ibn Tayymiyah (rahimahullah). I never understood those new age scholars and imams.
Imaam Ahmad, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Katheer, al-Barbaharee, Ibn Qayyim, Ibn Abdil Wahhab, Ibn Baaz, al-Albaanee, Ibn Uthaymin and those who were upon what they were upon.
Rahimahumullaah.
How deviated this analysis is. His whole argument that the system isn’t a problem but the fact that they are kuffar. Then he speaks that actually the system of governance doesn’t matter it is actually the private sector. As if the current private sector isn’t the result of the nation state (you can argue the state is the result of the capitalistic economy/private sector) but either cases it facilitates its function and the private sector wouldn’t be this power if it wasn’t for the nation state. Second he states that nation state isn’t a problem for muslims as it doesn’t define who they are rather we would stay muslims under any circumstances, this disregards the main point hallak points which is even if you are a muslim you can’t be fully muslim in a nation state because you are not fulfilling the shahada that there no god but allah, instead we are worshiping the state itself (even if we acknowledge it or not) and all nation states nowadays are created by western power, along with their constitution. So we are not worshiping a state that has the sharia as their main source of legislation (which would make it be less bad- if this is doable in the first place) but a nation state that everything inside of it the creation of the west.
I think Shahid Bolsen is wrong:
Wael Hallaq, a prominent scholar in Islamic law and legal theory, critiques the nation-state model from a perspective informed by Islamic jurisprudence and historical analysis. He argues that the nation-state, as it emerged in the post-colonial world, often imposes Western-centric norms and structures that do not necessarily align with the diverse cultural, religious, and historical contexts of many regions, including the Middle East.
Hallaq's critique includes:
1. **Imposition of Western norms**: He argues that the nation-state model, largely derived from European experiences, is often imposed on societies without considering their unique historical, cultural, and religious backgrounds.
2. **Artificial borders**: Hallaq criticizes the arbitrary drawing of borders by colonial powers, which often divided ethnic, religious, and linguistic groups, leading to conflicts and instability.
3. **Secularism and centralization**: He critiques the secular nature of nation-states, which may conflict with religious values and traditions in many societies. Additionally, the centralization of power in the nation-state model can marginalize local communities and their traditional governance structures.
4. **Failure to accommodate pluralism**: Hallaq argues that the nation-state model often fails to accommodate the diverse religious, ethnic, and cultural identities within its borders, leading to marginalization and conflicts.
5. **Limited legitimacy**: He questions the legitimacy of nation-states in regions where colonialism imposed them, arguing that they often lack genuine popular support and legitimacy.
Overall, Hallaq's critique underscores the need for alternative political models that are more inclusive, culturally sensitive, and compatible with the diverse realities of societies, particularly in the Middle East and other post-colonial regions.
@thewhitemoor - Wael Hallaq is a Christian Arab so how on earth can he be correct given his partial understanding of Islam? Shahid Bolsen at least makes the incisive observation that Islam is about correctly comprehending reality which Hallaq as a non-Muslim cannot do.
Think about it this way (which is what Bolsen is arguing), even with the restrictions apparent from adopting the nation state model how does that prevent Muslims from operating the system according to Islam? Is it impossible for a system of justice to be established? What about transparency, accountability and consultation? How does the nation state model prevent Muslims from effecting these Qur'anic imperatives?
That is why Hallaq's thesis is problematic.
Was hoping for a nuanced, intellectual and educational discussion, ended up with demagoguery, name calling, superficial analysis and many base-less opinions!! You can do better than this, for such an important subject, or just leave it be.
What you got was the bottom line, actually. You just don't like it.
@@MiddleNation You can do better than this brother Shahid, I know you can. I've been following you for almost a year now and have watched dozens of hours of your videos where you have come up with some real gems, Jazaka Allahu Khayran. But, this is not it, this style of attacking the holders of certain ideas and assuming intentions and/or motivations is not productive and, dare I say, not aligned with Islamic intellectual spirit. You are at your best when you focus on the abstract idea itself and ignoring the supposed personality behind it. May Allah guide us all to his righteous path.
Where is the book and is it in English?
Yes, it's available in English. I believe PDF may be available online.
With all due respect, i do not think you understood his analysis or argument well. Please refrain from giving opinions on subjects out of your knowledge, otherwise, you would be spreading bad seeds in people
You are concerned that my disagreement with what a non-Muslim says is compatible with Islam will spread bad seeds?
It seems as if you have severely misunderstood Hallaq's ideas. It's unfair to publish such a video without completing the book in the first place (at least that's the impression I'm getting through this vid).
Media is not posting pro Palestinians comments.
Ассаламу Алайкум. Из Москва.
walaikum asslaam from a muslim
Nice point of view ,but dr hallaq was misunderstood, he thinks that Islamic movements and politics in these decade in islamic country trying to fit in moderne state model have no sense, thats the core subject so he is calling for a new model to fit with Islamic chariaa and not the khilafa
It may not have an immediate effect to the average person. However, as time on it will effect the average person..
Love your channel, and I'm a member. But you're constantly speaking in a vacuum. It would be great to get WH (shouldn't be hard) and others you disagree with (Sami Hamdi for example) on to discuss your points in length.
Free free free Palestine once and for all, it’s been to long❤❤❤❤❤😂
This is such a shallow analysis. Shahid talks in circles and ends up essentially making Wael's points over and over again whilst misunderstanding the very context of the discussion. It's like a guy walking into a room and rehashing points in the discussion that have already been acknowledged.
Yes. We know HT are clowns. Now please stop behaving is such a shallow and tribal manner.
We Muslims would be better off if they read the books of Ibn Tayymiyah (rahimahullah). I never understood those new age scholars and imams.
@@aljoumeyli then why are you on TH-cam?
So you saying we learnt the Islam that the colonizers have taught us, so where do you suggest one learn the correct Islam?
🤍
I respectfully disagree with Shahid on this one. Firstly the premise is all wrong. Sovereignty of the Sharia is a condition to be a Muslim in the first place. The nation state is Sovereignty of the regime over anything else including the Sharia. Secondly the Sharia addresses essential elements of Human experience and condition such as Social structures and institutions, the Economic system and the very basis for the Islamic Politics itself. Thirdly the Quran. is the constitution of Islam and the Sunna is itself details with the Hadiths and the archives of the Sahaba and those who succeeded them, and the legacy of Fiqh jurisprudence of the Madhabs along with Ijtihad. Fourthly there must be a means of mutual consultion between the the rulers and the Ulema to guide the affairs of the country. Fifthly the citizens must be in an environment that has the signs of Islam known by common sense, and a spirit solidarity must be promoted based on Islamic brotherhood and not Patriotism to the state identity, and the people must be groomed to protect this state of Islam in idea ,in support and in military action for the sake of Allah. Loyalty to Allah,His Rasul and the Din of Islam requires being disavowed from Shirk , Kufr and the modern plagues of Liberalism, Secularism and the Usury of Capitalism that has bled Humanity dry . This is a tall order but we must stop settling for substandards and defeatist ideologies that continue to weaken the Umma.
Respectfully, there is too much confused in this comment for me to sort it out.
I don't particularly understand how improving the state of the ummah is 'settling for defeatist ideologies'
@@MiddleNation Begin with. حكم سيادة الشريعة
@Xtreme-yb9yo Secularism and Liberalism is not improving the Umma, rather it's Kufr.
@@briancordero7674 I'm not talking about those. You're acting as if any other alternative political model than your idea of an 'islamic state' will make it impossible for the ummah to improve, which makes no sense.
Are you sure everything desirable came into the world in the 7th century? Maybe the best aspects of Islam are actually vestiges from Arab paganism and not products of religious innovation.