Azami 7683

Bukhari narrated it in Ahkam (7139) from Abu Yaman, who said, Shuayb informed us, from Zuhri, who said, Muhammad bin Jubayr bin Mutim used to narrate it, and he mentioned it.There is no disagreement among the scholars of the Sunnah and the community that the supreme imam, by which I mean the ruler over all the Islamic territories, is required to be from Quraysh. But the legal texts indicate that this obligatory precedence given to them in leadership is conditional on their upholding the religion and obeying Allah and His Messenger. So if they violate Allah's command, then someone else who obeys Allah Almighty, carries out His commands, and establishes His limits, is more deserving than them. The evidence for this is his saying, ﷺ "As long as they uphold the religion." This is because the word "ma" here functions as a temporal expression qualifying his statement, "This matter belongs to Quraysh." The meaning is thereby established as, this matter remains with Quraysh for as long as they uphold the religion, implying that if they do not uphold the religion, it will no longer remain with them.It has been narrated from Ibn Masud that he said, "We were with the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, nearly eighty men from Quraysh, none among them but a Qurashi. By Allah, I have never seen faces more handsome than theirs were that day. They mentioned women and began talking about them, and he spoke with them until I wished he would stop." He said, "Then I came to him, and he recited the testimony of faith, then said, 'Now then, O assembly of Quraysh, this matter belongs to you as long as you do not disobey Allah. But if you disobey Him, He will send against you someone who will strip you bare as this stick is stripped,' referring to a stick in his hand. Then he stripped the bark from his stick, and it turned out white and smooth."Ahmad narrated it (4380) from Yaqub, who said, my father narrated to us, from Salih, Ibn Shihab said, Ubaydullah bin Abdullah bin Utba narrated to me that Ibn Masud said, and he mentioned it.Abu Yaala narrated it (5024) through Musab bin Abdullah Zubayri, from Ibrahim bin Saad, from Salih (who is Ibn Kaysan), and he mentioned it, except that in this version it says thirty men.Hafiz said in Fath al-Bari (116/13), "Its narrators are trustworthy, except that it is narrated by Ubaydullah bin Abdullah bin Utba bin Masud, from his father's uncle Abdullah bin Masud, whom he did not meet. This is the version of Salih bin Kaysan from Ubaydullah. Habib bin Abu Thabit differed from him, narrating it from Qasim bin Muhammad bin Abdul-Rahman, from Ubaydullah bin Abdullah bin Utba, from Abu Masud Ansari, with the wording, 'This matter will remain among you, and you will be its guardians.' Ahmad narrated this hadith (17069). There is some question regarding whether Ubaydullah actually heard from Abu Masud, based on the disagreement over the year of his death." He said, "It also has a corroborating report from the mursal narration of Ata bin Yasar, which Shafii narrated, and from him Bayhaqi (144/8), with a sahih chain reaching Ata, with the wording that he said to Quraysh, 'You are the people most entitled to this matter, as long as you remain upon the truth, unless you turn away from it, in which case you will be stripped bare as this palm branch is stripped.'" End of quote.So if a man from Quraysh came forward and claimed he was more entitled to leadership than others while being wicked, we would not accept his leadership. Among the conditions for leadership at the outset is that the leader be just.But if someone seized power over the people by force, whether he was a Qurashi or an Abyssinian slave whose head was like a raisin, as mentioned in the hadith, obedience to him becomes obligatory. There is a difference between choosing a leader and someone seizing control over the people by force. In the latter case, we hear and obey, and we do not rebel against him, unless we see open, undeniable disbelief with no possible other interpretation.As for anyone other than the supreme imam, I do not know of anyone who required that he be from Quraysh. Rather, the matter is left to whoever prevails, takes charge of governance, and establishes security. He then becomes the imam, whose pledge of allegiance and obedience become obligatory, and whom it is forbidden to contest or disobey.Sheikh Islam Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhab, may Allah have mercy on him, said, "The leading authorities of every school of jurisprudence agree that whoever prevails over a land or lands has the ruling status of an imam in all matters. Were it not for this, the world would not have remained stable, for people, for a long time before Imam Ahmad up to our own day, have never united behind a single imam, and they do not know of any scholar who stated that any legal ruling is only valid through the supreme imam." Durar Saniyyah fi Ajwibah Najdiyyah (5/12).Shawkani, may Allah have mercy on him, said, "As for after the spread of Islam, the expansion of its territory, and the distance between its regions, it is well known that in every region or set of regions authority came to rest with an imam or sultan, and likewise in another region or regions. Neither ruler's command or prohibition takes effect in the other region or regions that fall under someone else's authority. There is therefore no harm in having multiple imams and sultans. Obedience is obligatory to each one of them, after the pledge of allegiance has been given to him, upon the people of the region in which his commands and prohibitions take effect, and likewise for the ruler of the other region. If someone rises up to contest him in the region where his authority has been established and whose people have pledged allegiance to him, the ruling regarding that person is that he is to be killed if he does not repent." Sayl Jarrar Mutadaffiq ala Hadaiq Azhar (941/1).For this reason, we have not found, for a long time, that any scholar objected to the rule of the Mongols, the Ghaznavids, the Mamluks, the Fatimids, or the Ottomans on the grounds that they were not from Quraysh. Rather, scholars obeyed them, fought alongside them against the disbelievers, and took on sensitive positions such as judgeship, oversight of religious endowments, administration of education, and other posts.As for what has been said, that requiring Qurashi descent for the supreme imam entails tribal partisanship, and that Islam fought against the tribal partisanship of the pre-Islamic era, Sheikh Islam bin Taymiya, may Allah have mercy on him, said in his Fatawa (429/9-430), "This, meaning the prohibition of tribal partisanship, does not mean the absence of preference between peoples, for the majority of scholars hold that the people of Quraysh as a group are better than others. But preferring the group as a whole does not entail that every individual within it is better than every individual elsewhere, for among non-Arabs there are many people better than most Arabs, and among the Muhajirin and Ansar who were not from Quraysh there are those better than Quraysh. This applies to worldly rulings. As for the rulings of the afterlife, concerning reward, punishment, and honor before Allah, lineage has no bearing on this at all. It depends solely on piety and righteous deeds."