“They are incredibly civilised…when it comes to cheese….” I cackled. 😂 Brilliant conversation. I absolutely loved it. The little riffs both Paul and Imam Tom goes off on keeps it on its toes.

I can listen to Imam Tom and brother Paul for hours ❤️❤️❤️

My favorite youtube channel. Paul never lowered the quality standard of Blogging Theology, thank you, Paul and Imam Tom.

Always a pleasure!

Every time you say Subhan Allah Allah will plant a tree for you in Jannah 🌳 😇 ❤

Thank you so much. Please have Imam Tom on again discussing other books. He is truly a gem in the Ummah. Also, Brother Paul, I hope you are taking good care of yourself, have hot meals, drink water and try to get plenty of rest. May Allah ease everything for you.

Every thing in these episodes with Tom is so sophisticated. I've really got to learn lots from them! Thanks for you Mr Paul & Mr Tom for your time and may Allah grant you as well as us, success in this life and the hereafter!

Masha Allah, another great episode. May God strengthen you brother Paul.

SubhanAllah. Imam Toms comprehension is amazing. 100% agree.

I would really live to see a book or a series called "the possible state" or something alike - talking about what should we do in this day and age to actually achieve what hundreds of millions around the world are dreaming of, an actual Islamic state. I really want to see what Imam Tom has to say about this.

This series just keeps getting better on the book with more golden nuggets. Jzkl

I love Imam Tom speech. He use al-quran and Hadith as a reference and have quite a broad knowledge in Islam.

Such a beneficial & enjoyable conversation. Jazakum Allah khair.

This is one of the few "blogging theology" videos I watched fully, it was very interesting

Thanks Tom and Paul, this series has been very informative and beneficial! Looking forward to hear more from Tom. Already a subscriber to Utica Masjid, brilliant content there! Thank you for that and for benefiting the umma immensely.

Masha Allah. This is exactly the answer I was looking for. I always thought that the separation of power is neat as an idea, but evidently terrible in practice. Because if a body politic, like a political party, controls all the executive, legislative, and judiciary, then would it not be another form of absolute power? I'm now really convinced that only Islam and Shari'a can ever create a community where justice is uphold. Because only when people realise that there is an afterlife and everything we do in this world, however small, will have consequences there, then those people would act just.

Thank you Brother Paul and Imam Tom for this wonderful content, may Allah (SWT) reward both of you for your efforts.

Insightful as always. Al-Hamdu lillah

I think this is a best channel which truly is enlightening people about islam on solid grounds. May Allah accept this from you.

THANK YOU ALLAH ALMIGHTY FOR EVERYTHING YOU GIVE ME IN THIS LIFE AND FOR PROTECTING AND TAKING CARE OF ME AND FOR BEING THERE FOR ME WHEN I FEEL DOWN AND RAISING ME UP PROTECT US ALL O ALLAH 🙏☪️☪️

Very interesting indeed. And profound. I'm incredibly grateful for imam tom distilling the content of this book for my humble brain to understand, which I would have struggled.

Jazakumullahu Khairun. May Allah SWT bless you both with Firdaus. 🤲

@BloggingTheology Masha Allah. Such an eye opener. Would love to see the 2 of you do a series on what an Islamic State would look like in daily practice. Like infrastructure, security, welfare, education, utilities, etc.

Ma sha Allah-- I will have to listen all parts now

Thanks for sharing this Saturday gift brother Paul - JAK!

Jazakallah Khair Imam Tom and Ustad Paul

Back with this gem 💎

The best conversationalists on KZfaq!! Was waiting for this drop!

Barak Allah Akhi Paul for ur work 🌹👍🏼

thank you both, may allah enlighten us

Thank you brother Paul and Imam Tom! You are both brilliant.

Excellent discussion.

Mrs Paul Mashallah you're great .I love love all your video mashallah may Allah increase your knowledge.

Superb content MashaAllah

First comment 🤍 Imam Tom Facchine you're the best

Masha allah very good commentary and presentation for other way of better state for the Umma and world. (Impossible state) Thank you both of you, may allah bless you

I would push the whole idea in the book with the question of what paradigm the Author was operating with as lense for his observation when interpreting the reality of the modern state to build his arguments to then to make a conclusion?

Fascinating discussion, just ordered the book! I think it has important insights for geography teachers and the topic of development

Thanks a lot Tom and Paul, this series has been extremely informative and beneficial! Please continue with some other books/topics.

This is another great addition to the Paul and Imam Tom classics.

شكرًا

Alhamdulillah. Have not been let down.

Excellent discussion..par intellectual 👍

Very enlightening

When God is sovereign, then debates surrounding abortion become irrelevant. Islam solves many of the World's problem!

Phenomenal podcast 👍🙂

Selam Alejkum Poul love your Chanel and love Tom great mind’s! Alhamdulila

Wooow nice video ❤🎉❤

Thank you for Mr. Paul and Mr. Tom for this... I loved it so much. Deeping down my knowledge about Islam and politics, which is I tot it's only historical fiction...

Thank you

Hahaha, I never imagined I would hear the phrase "Imam Tom" in my life....😁

Can you do a talk on David Graeber's book Debt the first 5000 years

One of my teachers DR Abdullah bin Yusuf Al-Judai has also written a book on these called تقسيم المعمورة and his conclusions differ greatly and he quotes orthodoxy on the matter. We’re actually studying it as part of our B.A sharia course…

Sovereignty belongs to Allah alone. Understand this, and the foundation of Islamic polity can be built.

Amazing. This is one of many reason that "they" try to shunt Islam. Insyaallah in the future, the sharia will be implemented for the better of Bani Adam.

Hi Paul. Please also do a video presentation with Iman Tom of what is the antithesis of the modern nation state in terms of classical Islamic model of political governance with Shariah and word of God as main supreme paradigm with clear example of when was it last done and where to start from in terms of its revival?

Link to Part 1: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eNNiiNyCsrGXeZs.html Link to Part 2 : kzfaq.info/get/bejne/abOWZcWLvanOoWQ.html

PRAY FOR THE GREAT UPCOMING OF ALLAH LORD ALMIGHTY TO COME IN THIS TIME IN NEED PRAY AND FIGHT BACK AGAINST THE PLANS OF THE EVIL WICKED THAT THEY MAY NEVER ADVANCE BUT BE SNUFFED OUT PRAY AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF WICKED EVIL THAT THEY FALL INTO THERE OWN NET AND TRAP AND THAT WERE MEANT FOR MY PEOPLE IN ALLAH ALMIGHTY NAME AMEN MASHALLAH SUBNANALLAH 🙏☪️☪️

Wow ❤️❤️

A British Muslim and American Muslim discussing a Palestinian Christian's book. Nice

I have heard shaykh abdal hakim murad critique and contrast so called modern Islamic nation-states with the traditional Islamic political understanding/expression. AH this lecture echoes the same understanding

I find it a worthwhile endeavour to think about how society could be improved and it should be encouraged. I also think its not unreasonable to demand a certain degree of clarity and honesty from the one who is presenting, so the viewer does not have to decipher what this system actually entails and how it might play out in practice. The system promoted here is a "totalitarian theocracy" based on the Salafi ideology, an Ideology which organisations like the Taliban, Al Qaeda and also Isis base their worldview and actions on and is actively promoted by Saudia Arabia. Which should not come as a surprise, since Imam Tom studied at the Islamic University of Madinah, which is government funded and known to export Salafi-inclined theologians around the world. The endgoal of this ideology is to establish a world-wide caliphate under the rule of sharia. This a society in which the ability to influence political decision making is effectively removed from the vast majority of the population. A Judiciary operating outside and completely independent of government, while simultaneously holding power over government and also being recognised by said government is simply impossible (and I could explain in detail, for those who don’t immediately identify the obvious contradiction) . All political, military, economic power in this system will be concentrated in the hands of a few (mostly the so called "ulema" which Imam Tom would certaily like to be a member of). Parliament, Elections, Political Parties, Oversight, independent press, freedom of speech, an opposition will not exist. This leads to various effects, as can not only be seen in history but also current existing systems. High-level Corruption, Economic monopolies, due to Lack of representation : unrest and possible formation of competing systems, that are in violent opposition to the government Discrimination and persecution of minorities and women, complete loss of individual freedoms and - given modern technology - elimination of privacy, establishment of a police state and decline of scientific and social development Some of those problems also keep rearing their ugly head in democracies, the difference is that democracy has mechanisms in place to constantly push back against those, a totalitarian theocracy does not. Thats why I personally consider democracy a vastly more desirable system than the one promoted by Imam Tom.

Is there a german translation of the book available?

Can't find part 2!

Yeah, like Imran Hussein said for a long time any Muslim country that uses a democratic election system should not be called an Islamic state ruling.

Very relevant topic which was always misunderstood but Quran spoke clearly about it and said those kafir who go against the laws of Quran or govern secular laws.

at the mo' i'm reading Buchan, Witch Wood ... in it he mentions the Amalekites on page 49 and again on page 60 ... i've read to page 67, there may be more mentions. the book is written in 1927; it occurs to me it may connect to the israeli prime ministers mentionings in this day and age

If you read objective resolution which is included in Pakistan's constitution which is an example where the idea of nation state and islamic state go together.

Dear Imam Tom, could you shed more light on why the problem of bureaucracy would be done away with under the sharia paradigm? Wouldn't a bureaucracy still be needed to interpret and implement laws formulated by the ulema? Isn't the principle of separation of powers likely to be violated under the sharia system as well?

These types of powerful organisations are called QUANGOs in the UK. They can have far reaching powers across governmental functions.

hey mr paul,can u invite jefrey lang here,thx.

Fascinating book, I recall reading it some time ago. Yet the dilemma which has not been addressed are the implications. If the nation-state arrangement is antithetical to Islamic law, then what should traditional Muslims do now? They can't rewind history, yet trying to Islamicize the state has already been shown by Hallaq to be a failure. I haven't heard a good answer to this question. Shariah societies were decentralized and organic mostly because of the premodern, preindustrial and pre-technological historical context in which they existed which were less complex. Just comparing a 21st century state structure to a 15th century one without talking about the context which led to that structure's development is not really helpful.

The example he gave for child care services seems to be also true for the social care services taking away childrens in many European countries who they were supposed to protect.

What is this word HALAK?? Did I hear and spell correct.? I never heard it anywhere?

As recently as the late 19th century, Pope Pius IX issued his Syllabus of Errors, which denounces and repudiates numerous modern ideas and ideologies, not least of which are liberalism and the separation of church and state. The medieval papal bull, Unam Sanctam, affirms the sovereignty of the Church over the State in no uncertain terms. Modern Western Christianity is indeed out of keeping with how Christianity was practiced throughout most of its history. Also, there was a degree of legal pluralism in Christian Europe. This is why Jews could lend money at interest in the medieval era, because they were exempt from Catholic canon law prohibitions placed on Christians which forbade them to lend at interest.

Another thing. 55:07 The claim, that without any elections, there can be a better system of representation. The reasoning is that 1. a judical "caste" recruits their members from a wide range of society. 2. There can be slightly different judicial systems. 3. The scripture itself, somehow. Those 3 things guarantee are better representation. Now in reality, not everybody has the ability or interest to become a judge (even though under this system it sure is a good way to get representation/power). Common folk like me have to learn how to fix a generator, for example. And those people are needed to run a society. The problem people like me then face is that there are then Mullahs in power, that I cannot remove by vote, even if they repeatedly don´t represent my interests. Also, history shows, that members of a caste, tend to not recruit as widely and indiscriminately, to put it mildly. I fail to see how this is a better system of representation than the one we have in a democracy (despite lobbying and such). Bonus question: Can women become judges under this system?

Any expert here? I've a problem understanding one thing. Here we get to know all encompassing powerful state is as they say represents the popular will end of the day. So my question is this why are people willingly giving oath of allegiance to state? When they know their actual representation is not there? How come they were brainwashed into thinking in that way? And how come they comply with that? It seems apparently they have no problem with that. Elaborate anyone?

Let's say, once the power to make the ruler accountable is given to a council of scholars, a method that stands in contrast with the European model of political technology, then do you think that the council will remain immune from similar challenges? If the solution to this are Shariah and Taqwa, then why is it a problem to Shariah-source or legitimize or aim for a system akin to the current modern political technology?

Does Islam promote for a patriarchal state? (I do not intend to use the feministic understanding of the word 'patriarchy')

Traveling with no direction 🧠📲📺🙈😔 This difficulty that you're in it will come to an end. It will come to an End Qur'an 💯

Regulatory law or administrative law is certainly an end run around The constitution, referring to the United States and the example given about the department of environmental conservation and the Adirondack park Agency. However there are appeals processes which are rather slow and cumbersome which can be utilized, the system is not perfect it is flawed like any system but it has its benefits. I’m not so sure on law emanating from religious standards whether they be Islamic or any other religion as applied to secular society. Islamic Christian and Jewish religious law has been incorporated into secular law it does not have a dominance in regards to belief but rather has its application in civil and criminal law incorporated into a secular concept. Islam alone as a legal system for society would only bring us into the dark ages.

These type of scholars needs to make islamic government policies with integration of technological people.But in our countries all is running reverse.

Biggest threat to the matrix !!!!

But we did have khilafa, and then the ottoman imperialism happened . So why wasn’t it safeguarded by this logic ? I’m just playing devil’s advocate, since I do think it’s much better but that’s a question that’s been bothering me. Why did we lose it ?

Paul I was sure that this was a Muslim author. Now realizing that the author is a Christian, can you explain why he would write such a book that seems so pro-Islam?

God = moral law Heaven = Nation state That's how orthodox and catholic Christians belive

Secular means man made lows over Allah sharia low. How could it be normal where you have all different kind of tipe kriminals acting like a politicians. Interest in banks Taghut everywhere etc.

Thank you for this discussion. After listening to all three installments, I have a few thoughts in contradiction and some continuing curiosity. Please forgive my length. As you suggested earlier, I have waited for your concluding installment to perfect my understanding. You do not mention that political parties are made up of voters. If a party includes a majority of voters, that majority of voters should be able to decide, through their representatives, the issues of the day, should they not? Representatives are accountable to the voters to hold power beyond the next election. Perhaps the most famous example of a representative seeking to hold power regardless of voters’ will was Donald Trump. The voters kicked him out. He was held accountable to the voters (through the messengers in the electoral college). Democracy worked. You characterize the modern nation state (democracy) as separate from the voters. I assure you, from my experience within the executive, legislative branches and now performing an appointed judicial function, it simply is not separated from the voters. Individual voters may feel powerless because they are one among hundreds in a town, thousands in a county, millions in a (US) state, and hundreds of millions in a country. But elections at each of these levels concerning thousands, perhaps millions, of decisions to be made (taxation, education, public utility, transportation, crime, punishment, etc, etc) - many not addressed in Muslim law I imagine, occur with great frequency here. Each election an exercise in accountability. If Islamic scholars in an Islamic state determine appropriate taxation, are Christians and Jews to be exempt - not required to pay the tax based on their religious beliefs? Congratulations on your successful lawsuit - your democratic power applied through it, holding the New York DEC accountable. A good example of effective separation of executive and judicial powers in the modern secular state. I and most judges who I know are not products of an elite class, I assure you. You suggest that Sharia governance is independent from any government? If a Sharia system interprets law, and dictates behavior, it seems to me it is a government. Is it not? You referred to a “territory.” What “territory” to be governed by Sharia are you referring to? How are members of the Sharia scholar class “organically” selected and removed?

CRITIQUE @19:20 the fact that the rule of law was used to reign in the errant officials amid their malfeasance demonstrates the ethical propriety of the system in the US. Such is compatible with the best moral/ethical impulses laid out in the Qur'an and, therefore, would be thoroughly Islamic. It is, despite Imam Tom's cynicism, a positive not negative development. @28:23 the executive and judiciary in the ideal putative Islamic State are no less likely to legislate as they encounter new situations and circumstances. Imam Tom's point painting this dynamic in negative terms is therefore facile. @30:00 the State's law is not un-lslamic or anti-Islamic simply because it is sovereign and above all law: firstly, because the constitution trumps the State (and any ideal Islamic State would have its own constitution drawn from the Islamic sources); secondly, because an Islamic State relies on humans interpreting the Islamic sources to deduce law/legislation their deductions trump God's sovereignty whether we like to admit this inconvenient fact or not. @31:00 the US State could suspend the constitution (actually this would require someone at the nexus of power like the President and his administration) in theory, however, doing so would firstly require those with the power to do so to successfully negotiate all the checks and balances in place before plunging everyone into a state of autocracy. This is possible but unlikely in a modern democracy (the last minute experience of Trump's interference with Biden's election illustrates the point well). Similarly, whatever iteration of the Islamic State promulgated by the Muslims would face similar challenges. Imam Tom is simply mistaken on this front and his idealistic thinking blinds him to the realities of statehood. @32:30 Imam Tom states that in the Islamic State God is sovereign. This may be true in a theoretical, de jure, sense, but in a practical, de facto, sense it is simply untrue. Human interpretation is always required when reading the Qur'an and Sunnah and therefore their efforts in so doing transfers sovereignty onto those effecting the interpretation. Sufficient human effort results in the drafting of and agreement with the constitution which shapes everyday matters for the community \ Ummah and other non-Muslim citizens of the state. None of this entails the active sovereignty of God, since all related activities are thoroughly human in origin. @32:55 nowhere in the Qur'an does it state God expresses sovereignty via the Shari'ah. The only occasion in the Qur'an where Shari'ah is mentioned is in Surah al-Jathiyah, #45, Ayah #18, which is a Meccan chapter predating the point in time where law, legal matters and legislation occurred. @34:20 what has happened is that humankind has transitioned from a pre-modern mediaeval mindset into modernity. This means we modern humans appreciate matters in a different light to our predecessors. It also means Muslim conceptions need to catch up with this modern era and new modes of thinking about the world instead of thinking about Islam in monolithic, unchanging terms. This is not to say the Qur'an etc require updating, not at all, just that rigid, uncritical thinking about such requires ditching and reformulating in line with modern modes of thought and approaches. Otherwise, our outmoded version of Islam will become obsolete and/or the Muslims, who cleave to it, extinct. @38:00 Hallaq's thesis is simplistic - humans have agency throughout, even if revelation descends from God it has to be interpreted by human beings. The right of the poor to the wealth of the rich is one of God's stipulations (via the Qur'an), but humans still need to somehow write this into the constitution of the Islamic State to enshrine and encapsulate it in a suitable form for legal definition; thereafter all governments would need to interpret the particular clause in the constitution for the purpose of enacting appropriate legislation and by putting into place the necessary administrative levers to translate into State policy followed by the judiciary who would need to judge on abuses and to interpret who qualifies as poor and who as rich, how much the former deserve and how much the latter must give. These are complex matters egregiously and simplistically misrepresented by Hallaq's thesis of a sovereign God legislating sovereign law. @40:30 yet another facile point - the Ummah, its judges, scholars, thinkers and the community (including non-Muslims) would all have a say in a democratic system of Islamic governance. They would not, however, have a say in an autocratic system. Despite what Imam Tom says about the special role of various Muslim scholars in interpreting the law being more democratic, privileging a particular segment of society turns out from bitter experience to be a sure-fire way of ensuring the oppression and injustice of autocracy, no more anti-Islamic a position can one wish for. @42:25 Imam Tom gets his history wrong here - during the imperial period of the Islamic State (from Mu'awiya onwards) the Ulama \ jurists were mostly in opposition to the autocratic government of the Caliphate. If given favoured status in the modern state, the jurists would surely/eventually end up committing the same autocratic mistakes as their ancestors who made disgusting accommodations with the Ummayyads and Abbasids etc. @46:20 legal pluralism in the Islamic State only extends to aspects of family law and religious rites of non-Muslim communities (e.g. Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus etc). Everyone else and regarding all other laws would be applied according to State directives as interpreted by the judiciary empowered by the State to judge. This is perhaps one of the few distinctions between an Islamic and non-Islamic system, but it is a minor distinction at that, because I would imagine the State would allow, for example, a Jewish woman to petition for equal inheritance or equitable divorce settlement via the State court system rather than having to rely on the Jewish community courts where her rights might be more limited. Thus, in line with Qur'anic prescriptions, injustice must be appropriately challenged under an Islamic State even if by doing so this would conflict with non-Muslim rites. @50:00 any future Islamic State would do likewise in jealousy promulgating its State laws etc so there is no difference between the nation state and the Islamic State in this respect. @51:21 it is not a badge of honour to learn Islam in Medina situated in the autocratic state of Saudi Arabia where people are not free to voice their opinions and where academic freedom does not exist. At the very least, the Saudi state does not permit opposition to its rule, including antithetical ideas at the educational level. This means university teachers and scholars are conservative in their teaching which serves their students' learning poorly. Imam Tom's views in this video betray the impact traditionalist, conservative dogma has had on his thoughts. @53:53 is Imam Tom saying legal representation in the ideal future Islamic State free? Or significantly cheap? Really? Are lawyers anywhere around the world cheap to hire to argue legal matters? If so, wouldn't that in itself encourage too many frivolous cases? Which reality is he living in? @55:00 there are ONLY two, not three, choices when it comes to government - democracy and autocracy. Muslims have to decide whether they want the state they live in to be one or the other. However, like individuals, they cannot choose to sell themselves into slavery because God has instructed them not to in the Qur'an therefore they must choose a democratic rather than autocratic model. @56:05 astoundingly naïve and uncritical assertions - scholars/jurists/judges are mostly not independent of the government; each requires an education and each requires an appropriate position/appointment. In this respect, most scholars/jurists/judges require state funding for their education resulting in a government sector job paid for via taxpayers' money. This is the pattern throughout the modern world these days, particularly within the democratic paradigm. @58:40 the abuses against Muslims in France and Sweden are just that, unjust and oppressive. But this happens in ALL states to a greater or lesser extent, more particularly in autocratic ones where redress is not possible whatsoever. Analogous challenges would face people living in the Islamic State.

1:00:34 So Judges can be engaged in business activities in areas where they are also the only legal authority and the only thing keeping them in check is scripture, that does not contain any rulings on modern business practices and which they are free to interpret? What could possibly go wrong! This is actually the perfect recipe to create Mullah-Warlords which at some point start fighting against each other and the government over ressources. Thinking about it: this is exactly what is happening in Afghanistan right now and keeps happening all over the middle east. I think I´ve just identified a root cause.

57:51 Thats the theory. Here is how it plays out in practice: "By one estimate, 80% of the 600+ Saudi judges and almost all senior judges[58] come from Qasim, a province in the center of the country with less than 5% of Saudi's population,[59] but known as the strict religious Wahhabi heartland of Saudi Arabia.[55] Senior judges will only allow like-minded graduates of select religious institutes to join the judiciary and will remove judges that stray away from rigidly conservative judgments.[60]" - Wikpedia - Legal system of Saudi Arabia

According to Islam , Mary can have a Son, without a man touching her . But inorder for Allah to have a Son, he needs a wife . Who is greater here between the two ? Ofcourse Mary .

Imam Tom or imam sam, is utter disrespect to islam, if you are unwilling to change to an islamic name dont convert to islam,, these days its absolutly crazy times, we have a guy who calles himself eddie from the deen show tv, ask him what is eddie, there are even some mulims arabs calling themselves MO (MOHHAMMED), NOW WE HAVE AN IMAM TOM, UTTER DISGRACE,, TOMORROW WE WILL HAVE IMAM LAKSHAMI, IMAM RAM,

I love Imam Tom's superh comprehension of texts. Unlike camel urine drinking sheiks who can READ a text, unless you can COMPREHEND it you may still misinterpret and mislead peoole. Thats why the English portion of any exam includes BOTH reading & comprehension not just reading and memorizing.