🚀 go-pugleaf

kkdf@rocketmail.com wrote:
:
: >Fredrik Arne Bennison and Louis Epstein questioned whether monarchies are
: not allowed in Islam and cited 'examples' like Saudi Arabia, Morocco,
: Jordan, etc.
:
: Just because there are self-appointed kings and princes in those
: countries, which have mostly Muslims living in them, doesn't necessarily
: make it valid.  Neither dictatorships nor hereditary leadership is allowed
: in Islam.

The great division between Sunni and Shiah Islam is that the Shiites
consider the Sunnis to have deviated from the direct hereditary
succession from Mohammed.Throughout Islam descendants of Mohammed are
entitled to the honorific Seyyed and a black turban.Hereditary leaders
have ruled throughout the history of the faith.

: Those men-whoever they are-put themselves in their positions,
: some would argue with the support of the USA for strategic purposes (oil,
: etc.). The USA and other 'western' countries get to plunder them for their
: natural resources, while the 'king' or dictator in return gets his ego
: puffed up and plenty of material wealth for himself and his family. A true
: Muslim leader must be responsible regarding the environment and wouldn't
: allow the oil to be drained at the astonishing rate it is being so now
: (leave some for future generations).

I don't think this theological position has much currency in Islam.

kkdf@rocketmail.com writes:

>>Fredrik Arne Bennison and Louis Epstein questioned whether monarchies are
>not allowed in Islam and cited 'examples' like Saudi Arabia, Morocco,
>Jordan, etc.

>Just because there are self-appointed kings and princes in those
>countries, which have mostly Muslims living in them, doesn't necessarily
>make it valid.  Neither dictatorships nor hereditary leadership is allowed
>in Islam. Those men-whoever they are-put themselves in their positions,

Strange then that it is stated that King Hussein of Jordan is a 42nd generation
straight descendant of the Prophet Muhammad, and that his branch of the
Hashemite family ruled in Mecca from 1201 to 1925.  And that King Hussein is
the third King since Jordan regained independence from GB in 1946...

Seems to me that inheritance is indeed permitted at least in Jordan.  My guess
is that similar stories can be found on the other Muslim monarchies, but I
don't have the time to spend on it at the moment.

//  Fredrik

In article <fab03.876032972@wraith>,
  fab03@uow.edu.au (Fredrik Arne Bennison) wrote:
>
> kkdf@rocketmail.com writes:
>
> >>Fredrik Arne Bennison and Louis Epstein questioned whether monarchies are
> >>not allowed in Islam and cited 'examples' like Saudi Arabia, Morocco,
> >>Jordan, etc.
>
> >Just because there are self-appointed kings and princes in those
> >countries, which have mostly Muslims living in them, doesn't necessarily
> >make it valid.  Neither dictatorships nor hereditary leadership is allowed
> >in Islam. Those men-whoever they are-put themselves in their positions,
>
> Strange then that it is stated that King Hussein of Jordan is a 42nd
generation
> straight descendant of the Prophet Muhammad, and that his branch of the
> Hashemite family ruled in Mecca from 1201 to 1925.  And that King Hussein is
> the third King since Jordan regained independence from GB in 1946...
>
> Seems to me that inheritance is indeed permitted at least in Jordan.  My guess
> is that similar stories can be found on the other Muslim monarchies, but I
> don't have the time to spend on it at the moment.
>
> //  Fredrik

Claiming direct descent from Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is a
tactic used by 'king' Hussein in an attempt to fool/obtain the sympathy
of the Jordanian Muslims; it is not true.  And he certainly doesn't
behave as one would expect from a supposed descendant!	For example, this
is the man who called Rabin after his death a "hero" even though he broke
the bones of (at least ordered) innocent Muslim children. Plus, in Islam
a person who actively seeks the leadership is to be prevented from
obtaining it (due to motives).	A Muslim leader has enormous
responsibilities to the point where he cannot even get much sleep at
night [who wants sleepless nights?]let alone use public funds to live a
lavish lifestyle.  Contrast this to today's leaders worldwide (including
Muslim countries) where they seek office only for ego and financial
rewards while in office and afterwards. So, he can claim whatever he
wants, but it doesn't necessarily make it correct.

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
      http://www.dejanews.com/     Search, Read, Post to Usenet

kkdf@rocketmail.com wrote:

This tactic was also used by the Abbasi Khalifa's. So did they also
attempt to fool the Muslims? They also used to live lavishly and enrich
themselves.

Salahuddin, the greatest hero of Islam, also used to have good relations
with some of the crusader leaders who did much worse than break bones.

If you believe that the Ottomans were legitimate leaders of Islam then
you must also believe that the Hasemites are descendents of the prophet.
It was the Ottomans who confirmed the Sharifian status of the Hashemites
in Mecca.

Apart from the first four Khalifas, almost all others obtained their
position using hereditary principles.

Finally, apart from the Rashidun Khalifas and the Umawi Khalifa Omar,
(whose reign lasted only three years) who in your opinion behaved as a
true leader of Islam?

I suggest that if you study the history of Islam, you will find that the
Hashemites have continued the same tradition, good or bad.

Imad

> Claiming direct descent from Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is a
> tactic used by 'king' Hussein in an attempt to fool/obtain the sympathy
> of the Jordanian Muslims; it is not true.  And he certainly doesn't
> behave as one would expect from a supposed descendant!  For example, this
> is the man who called Rabin after his death a "hero" even though he broke
> the bones of (at least ordered) innocent Muslim children. Plus, in Islam
> a person who actively seeks the leadership is to be prevented from
> obtaining it (due to motives).  A Muslim leader has enormous
> responsibilities to the point where he cannot even get much sleep at
> night [who wants sleepless nights?]let alone use public funds to live a
> lavish lifestyle.  Contrast this to today's leaders worldwide (including
> Muslim countries) where they seek office only for ego and financial
> rewards while in office and afterwards. So, he can claim whatever he
> wants, but it doesn't necessarily make it correct.