What's the plan for the leadership of Sunni Islam?

[PRND]

For many centuries, starting with the First Fitnah, Sunni Islam was led by caliphs. They were religious leaders of all Sunnis and they were also political leaders, always the leaders of trans-national empires, 100% of the time. They never led anything other than an empire. In my personal opinion, it was never a very good system of leadership for a fair number of reasons, but that's just my opinion and you don't have to share it.

As of 1930 however, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk dissolved the Ottoman Empire (an actual empire) and abolished the caliphate (the kind that actually had broad recognition by Sunni Muslims everywhere). Since then, there has been no more empire and no more caliph (no more Sunni caliph, at any rate). From 1930 to the present day....well, my question is this.

How do you assess what's become of Sunni leadership since then, in basic terms? From 1930 to the present day, what has replaced the caliph and the empire where Sunni leadership is concerned?

My other question is this. What should be the medium to long term plan for Sunni leadership? In particular, do you wish for the return of a caliphate with or without an empire, or do you have a particular idea of something different that should be done?

 

[anatolian]

In order to give a proper answer to your question I need to correct your mistakes. Atatürk did not abolish the constitution of khilafah in Islam. He abolished only the Ottoman khalifate. This occured in 1924 and he gave the mission of represation of khalifate to the Turkish Parliement. Eventually this mission too was abolished in 1930. Of course it was wrong but people who bash Atatürk for this just cant see the fact that in Islam the Khalifate as constitution is not under the control of a specific group of people. Any adult Muslim man can be the khalif. Ottomans took it in 1517 and it was in the Abbasids before that. So no Muslim out of Turkey wanted to be a candidate to be the next khalif of Muslims after Atatürk abolished it in Turkey. Why? Because the constitution was corrupted and betrayed by Muslims' themselves already before this date. Ummayyads turned it to a kingship passing to offsprings and continoued to be so until 1924. Maybe Atatürk did even a good job by giving it to the parliement at first but his real target was different. But the constitution was majorly betrayed in WW1. Muslim İndians and north africans came to fight against the army of khalif because they were controlled by the british and the french. Arabs too made an alliance with the brits and french and fought against the khilafah. So the Ottoman khilafah was practically terminated by Muslims themselves.

That means only one thing. Khilafah is both a spiritual and political constitution as you mentioned it and if you dont follow its spiritual rules or cant keep ıts political power, it is bound to corrupt and collopse at the end.

My interpretation, the Islamic history shows when Arabs did it firstly Allah sent Turks but when Turks did it Allah did not send another people. Anyway We have been living in a very corrupt age for the last a houndred years. Now people are just waiting for Mahdi to establish the real Khilafah again.

 

[M.I.A.]

An organisation similar to the united nations.

Comprised of member states and the invited.

The incentive being that aid and co-operation is given to those countries that are in need of it.

And trade is established between those that are more fortunate.

The natural dynamic and equilibrium should establish itself over time..

As it normally does..

The metaphorical silk scarf..

Rather than the actual silk scarf of reality.

 

[Ishaaq]

For many centuries, starting with the First Fitnah, Sunni Islam was led by caliphs. They were religious leaders of all Sunnis and they were also political leaders

Sunni Islam only recognizes the first five caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, and Ali's son Hasan) as "rightly-guided". After that the caliphate upon the model of Prophecy was discontinued. According to prophecy, it will be restored in the latter days, perhaps through the advent of the promised Mahdi.

This caliphate upon the model of prophecy only lasted for 30 years. After that the Muslims were ruled by various Arab dynasties (Omayyad than Abbasid) and then various Turkic and Mamluk dynasties, including the most famous (Ottomans). But orthodox Sunni Islam does not consider these as a "Caliphate" in the sense of being rightly-guided or on the model of Prophecy.

In Sunni Islam, the religious authority is confined to Prophets, since they have a direct communion with God through divine Revelation. Sunni Islam teaches that the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is the Last Prophet. Therefore, religious authority ended with him, and his successor in terms of religious authority is not any individual or institution apart from the Text of the Quraan.

Even the rightly-guided Caliphate after him did not possess religious authority, it was the succession to the Prophet's temporal authority.

This is contrary to Twelver Shiism which considers its Twelve Imams as inheriting religious authority from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.

The rightly-guided Caliphs can only be described as men of piety and an inspiration and model for Muslims to look to, but it is not an institution that has religious authority in the sense of the Catholic papacy or the Twelver Shiite Imamate, since we believe such divine authority is only invested in Prophets.

At present the Muslim world is bereft of a Caliphate. It is not really a religious institution but an administrative one, and the question of how it should be restored is not really a religious/theological question. Nevertheless, my view is that Muslims should simply wait for the expected Mahdi to appear, through whom God shall restore the rightly-guided Caliphate upon the model of Prophecy.

In terms of religious influence though, there are other institutions which are greater than the caliphate in its essence, such as the institution of Mujaddids (divinely-appointed Reformers).