Wakati jamii ya Kiislamu inapochunguzwa kwa msingi huu, yaani kuisoma kwa pande zake zote na kwa uchunguzi wa kina, inaweza kuonekana kuwa ni jamii bora kabisa. Hali hiyo ilikuwepo katika karne ya kwanza, ya pili na ya tatu, na kwa hakika hadi katikati ya karne ya kumi na mbili ya Hijra. Mtu anagundua kwamba jamii hiyo ilitekeleza Uislamu katika zama zake zote hadi mwisho wa Dola ya Ottoman kama dola ya Kiislamu. Hata hivyo, historia haipaswi kuchukuliwa kama chanzo cha kusoma mfumo na fiqh. Badala yake, mfumo unapaswa kuchukuliwa kutoka kwenye vyanzo vya fiqh na si kutoka kwenye historia, kwa kuwa historia si chanzo chake. Kwa hiyo, ili kuelewa mfumo wa Kikomunisti, mtu hafikii hitimisho kutokana na historia ya Urusi, bali kutokana na vitabu vya itikadi ya Kikomunisti yenyewe. Vivyo hivyo, ili kuelewa fiqh ya Kiingereza, haipaswi kuichukua kutoka kwenye historia ya Uingereza, bali kutoka kwenye vitabu vya fiqh ya Kiingereza. Hili linatumika kwa mfumo au kanuni yoyote ile.

When the Islamic society is studied on this basis i.e. to study it from all its aspects and through thorough investigation it can be found to be the best society. Since, it was so for the first, second and third centuries, in fact, right up to the middle of the twelfth century hijrah. One finds that the society applied Islam throughout all its ages right up to the end of the Ottoman State as an Islamic state. However, history should not be taken as the source for studying the system and fiqh. Rather, the system should be taken from the sources of jurisprudence and not from history, since history is not its source. Accordingly, to understand the Communist system, one does not draw conclusions from the history of Russia, but from the books of the Communist ideology itself. Likewise, if to understand the English jurisprudence one should not take it from the history of England, but rather from the books of English jurisprudence. This applies to any system or canon.

Uislamu ni itikadi yenye 'aqeedah yake na mfumo wake. Kwa hiyo, wale wanaotaka kuielewa hawapaswi kutumia historia yake kama chanzo, wala kwa ajili ya kupata elimu wala kwa ajili ya kuistinbati hukumu za kisheria, yaani aHkam.

Islam is an ideology with its own ‘aqeedah and system. Consequently, those who wish to understand it must not use its history as a source, neither for knowledge nor for deducing rules i.e. aHkam.

Chanzo cha kuelewa Uislamu ni vitabu vya fiqh ya Kiislamu, na chanzo cha kuchota hukumu zake ni ushahidi wake wa kina. Kwa hiyo, historia si chanzo sahihi cha mfumo wa Kiislamu, wala kwa kuuelewa wala kwa kuuchota. Hivyo si sahihi kuchukua historia ya 'Umar bin al-Khattab, 'Umar bin 'Abdul-'Aziz au Haroun ar-Rasheed, iwe kutoka matukio ya kihistoria yanayohusishwa nao au kutoka vitabu vilivyoandikwa katika vipindi vyao, kuwa chanzo cha aHkam Sharai'ah. Ikiwa maoni ya 'Umar yatafuatwa katika suala fulani, yatafuatwa kwa kuwa ni hukmu ya Shara'i iliyochotwa na kutumiwa na 'Umar, kama ilivyo kwa hukmu ya Shara'i iliyochotwa na Abu Hanifa, Shafi'i, Ja'far na wengineo. Haichukuliwi kama tukio la kihistoria. Kwa hiyo historia haina uhusiano wowote na kupitisha au kujua mfumo huo. Zaidi ya hayo, kubainisha kama mfumo ulitumika au la, ni fiqh, si historia, ndiyo rejeo la kuamua hilo. Hii ni kwa sababu kila zama ina matatizo yake, ambayo yalishughulikiwa kwa mfumo. Hivyo ili kupata mfumo uliotumika kutatua matatizo, ni lazima kurejea fiqh ya Kiislamu, na si matukio ya historia, kwa kuwa historia inatuletea tu habari kama zilivyo. Pindi unaporejea fiqh ya Kiislamu, hupati ndani yake mfumo wowote waliouchukua Waislamu kutoka kwa wengine, wala mfumo wowote waliouchagua Waislamu kutoka ndani yao wenyewe. Badala yake, unaiona kikamilifu ikiwa ni aHkam shar'ah zilizochotwa kutoka ushahidi wa kishari'ah. Waislamu walikuwa makini sana kuchuja fiqh kwa kuondoa maoni yenye upungufu, yaani ijtihad yenye upungufu. Walikataza hata watu wengine kutenda kwa maoni dhaifu, hata kama yamehusishwa na mujtahid mutlaq (mujtahid kamili).

The source of understanding Islam is the books of Islamic fiqh, and the source for deducing its rules is their detailed evidences. Thus, history is not the correct source of the Islamic system, neither for its understanding nor for its deduction. It is therefore incorrect to take the history of 'Umar bin al-Khattab or Umar bin 'Abdul-'Aziz or Haroun ar-Rasheed, whether from the historical events ascribed to them or from the books written during their respective periods, as a source for the aHkam Sharai'ah. If an opinion of Umar is followed in a question, it is followed in its capacity as a hukm Shara'i deduced and applied by Umar, as is the case with the hukm Shara'i deduced by Abu Hanifah, Shafii, Ja'far and others. It is not adopted as an historical event. History, accordingly, has nothing to do with adopting or knowing the system. Moreover ascertaining whether or not the system was applied, fiqh, rather than history, is the reference for determining that. This is because every era has its own problems, which were tackled by a system. So in order to find the system used to solve problems, one must refer to the Islamic fiqh, and not to the events of history, because it only reports to us the news as they are. When reference is made to the Islamic fiqh, one neither finds in it any system taken by the Muslims from others, nor any system chosen by the Muslims from themselves. Instead, one finds it completely as aHkam shar’ah deduced from the shar’ai evidences. Muslims were very careful to sift into the jurisprudence by removing any deficient opinions i.e. deficient ijtihad. They even prohibited others from acting according to the deficient (Daif) opinion, even if it was ascribed to a mujtahid mutlaq (absolute mujtahid).

Kwa hiyo, hakuna maandishi yoyote ya kisheria yasiyo Fiqh ya Kiislamu katika ulimwengu wote wa Kiislamu. Ukweli kwamba ni mwili mmoja tu wa fiqh uliopo katika taifa, bila maandishi mengine yoyote yanayoambatana nao, unaashiria kwamba taifa hilo halikutumia maandishi mengine yoyote katika sheria zake.

As a result, there is not one legislative text other than the Islamic Fiqh throughout the Islamic world. The fact only one body of jurisprudence exists in a nation, without any other accompanying text, signifies that the nation did not use any other text in its legislation.

Ikiwa ingeruhusiwa kutoa umakini kwa historia, basi jambo hilo lingebaki kwenye kuchunguza namna ya kutumia mfumo. Historia pia yaweza kuwa na matukio ya kisiasa, ambayo kutoka kwake namna ya utekelezaji yaweza kuonekana. Hata hili halipaswi kuchukuliwa isipokuwa baada ya utafiti wa kina na kutoka kwa Waislamu. Historia ina vyanzo vitatu: vitabu vya historia, vitu vya kiakiolojia, na simulizi. Vitabu vya historia havipaswi kuchukuliwa kuwa chanzo kwa sababu vinaathiriwa na hali za kisiasa za wakati husika. Vimejaa uongo, ama kuwaunga mkono watu ambao kwa wakati wao vitabu hivyo viliandikwa, au kuwashambulia wale waliokuwepo kabla ya vitabu hivyo kuandikwa. Mfano wa karibuni ni historia ya familia ya Allawi nchini Misri. Kabla ya mwaka 1952 W.K. ilikuwa na taswira nzuri katika vitabu vya historia, lakini baada ya mwaka 1952 W.K. taswira yake ikawa mbaya. Hali hiyo hiyo inatumika kwa historia ya matukio mengine ya kisiasa, ya sasa na ya zamani. Kwa sababu hiyo, vitabu vya historia havipaswi kuchukuliwa kuwa chanzo cha historia, hata kama vilikuwa wasifu ulioandikwa na watu wao wenyewe.

If it were permitted to give attention to history, this would be confined to examining the way of applying the system. History might also contain political events, from which the way of application can be seen. Even this should not be taken except after a thorough research and from Muslims. History has three sources: History books, archaeological objects and narration. Historical books should not be considered as a source because they are influenced by the political conditions of the time. They are filled with lies, either supporting the people at whose time these books were written or attacking those at the time before these books were written. A recent example of this is the history of the Allawide family in Egypt. Prior to 1952 C.E it had a bright image in history books, but after 1952C.E its image was dark. The same applies to the history of other political events now and in the past. For this reason, history books should not be considered as a source for history, even if they were biographies written by their people.

Vitu vya kale (uchimbaji wa mabaki ya zamani na mambo ya kale) vingeweza kutoa ukweli wa kihistoria endapo vingechunguzwa kwa uaminifu. Ingawa vyenyewe havitoi ratiba kamili ya matukio ya kihistoria, bado vinaonyesha kwamba baadhi ya matukio yalitokea. Mtu akichunguza mabaki ya Kiislamu yaliyopatikana katika nchi zao, iwe ni majengo, vyombo, au kitu kingine chochote, anaweza kuhitimisha kwamba hakukuwepo kitu chochote katika ulimwengu wa Kiislamu isipokuwa Uislamu, mfumo wa Uislamu na sheria za Uislamu. Zaidi ya hayo, mtindo wa maisha ya Waislamu na matendo yaliyofanywa yalikuwa ya Kiislamu.

Archaeological objects (excavation and antiquities) would provide historical facts if studied honestly. Although they by themselves do not provide a historical timeline, they however denote occurrence of some events. If one examines the Islamic antiquities found in their countries, be they buildings, instruments, or any other thing, one can conclude that nothing was present in the Islamic world except Islam, the system of Islam and rules of Islam. Additionally, the Muslims way of life and actions conducted were Islamic.

Chanzo cha tatu, yaani simulizi, ni chanzo sahihi, ambacho kinaweza kutegemewa endapo simulizi hiyo ilikuwa sahihi na mbinu iliyofuatwa katika kukusanya simulizi hiyo ilikuwa ile ile iliyofuatwa katika kukusanya Hadithi. Hivi ndivyo historia inavyopaswa kuandikwa. Waislamu walifuata mbinu hii ya usimulizi walipoanza kuandika. Vitabu vya kawaida vya historia, kama vile Historia ya at-Tabari, Sira ya Ibn Hisham n.k., viliandikwa kwa mbinu hii. Waislamu hawapaswi kuwafundisha watoto wao kutoka katika vitabu vya historia ambavyo vyanzo vyake ni vitabu vingine vya historia. Muhtasari wa utekelezaji wa mfumo wa Kiislamu pia haupaswi kuchukuliwa kutoka katika vitabu hivyo vya historia. Kwa kumalizia, ni wazi kwamba Uislamu peke yake ndio ulitekelezwa, na hakuna kitu kingine kilichotumika katika vipindi vyote.

As for the third source i.e. narration, it is a correct source, which can be relied on if the narration was correct and the method followed in collecting the narration was the same as the method followed in collecting the ahadith. This is the manner in which history should be recorded. The Muslims followed this method of narration when they commenced writing. The classical books of history, such as the History of at- Tabari, Sirah of Ibn Hisham etc. were written according to this method. Muslims should not teach their children from the books of history whose sources are other books of history. An overview of the application of the Islamic system should not be taken from those books of history either. In conclusion, it is evident that Islam alone was implemented and nothing else was applied throughout all the periods.

Hata hivyo, tangu mwisho wa Vita vya Kwanza vya Dunia, ambavyo vilimalizika kwa ushindi wa Washirika, kilele chake kikiwa tangazo la Lord Allenby, kamanda wa kampeni wakati wa kuukalia mji wa Yerusalemu (al-Quds), aliyesema: "Sasa Vita vya Msalaba vimekwisha". Tangu hapo, wakoloni makafiri wametulazimisha mfumo wa Kibepari katika mambo yote ya maisha, ili kuendeleza ushindi waliojipatia dhidi yetu. Kwa hiyo ni lazima tuuondoe mfumo huu uliooza na uliopotoka ambao kwa njia yake wakoloni wanadhibiti nchi zetu. Ni lazima tuung'oe kabisa, mara moja na kwa wote, ili tuweze kurejea katika mfumo wa maisha wa Kiislamu.

However, since the end of the First World War, which ended with the Allies victory culminating with the announcement of Lord Allenby, the commander of the campaign when occupying Jerusalem (al-Quds), stated: "Now the Crusades are over". The Kafir colonialists have applied upon us since then the Capitalist system in all life matters, to perpetuate the victory they achieved over us. We must therefore get rid of this rotten and corrupted system by which the colonialists control our countries. We have to completely uproot it, once and for all, so that we can resume the Islamic way of life.

Kuchukua mfumo mwingine badala ya mfumo wetu ni fikra ya chini na ya juujuu, na kudhani kwamba kama Ummah ungetekeleza mfumo bila 'aqeedah yake, ungeokolewa, ni fikra duni pia. Ummah lazima kwanza ukubali 'aqeedah, kisha utekeleze mfumo unaotokana na itikadi hii ('aqeedah). Utekelezaji wa mfumo pamoja na kuukubali itikadi ('aqeedah) ndio utakaokuwa wokovu. Hili linatumika kwa Ummah, ambao umejengwa juu ya itikadi, na kwa dola inayoanzishwa juu ya msingi huo. Kwa watu na mataifa mengine, si lazima wakubali itikadi kama sharti la kutekelezewa itikadi hiyo. Taifa linalokubali itikadi na kuifikisha kwa wengine linaweza kuitekeleza kwa watu au taifa lolote, hata kama hawaiamini. Hii ni kwa sababu itikadi hiyo pia itasababisha kufufuka kwa taifa hilo na kuwavutia kuiamini. Kwa hiyo kukubali itikadi si sharti kwa wale wanaotekelezewa, bali ni sharti la msingi kwa wale wanaoitekeleza.

It is a low superficial thinking to replace our system by any other system and it is a shallow thinking to consider that if the ummah applied the system without its '’aqeedah, it would save her. The Ummah must embrace the '’aqeedah first and then apply the system emanating from this doctrine (’aqeedah). The implementation of the system and embracing of the doctrine (’aqeedah) will then be a saviour. This applies to the Ummah, which is built upon an ideology and the state, which is established on this basis. As for the other peoples and nations, it is not necessary that they embrace the ideology as a prerequisite for applying the ideology upon them. The nation, which embraces the ideology and conveys it to others, can apply it on any people or nation, even if they do not believe in it. This is because the ideology will also result in the revival of that nation and will attract them to believe in it. Thus embracing the ideology is not a condition for those on which it is applied, it is rather an essential condition for those who implement it.

Ni hatari kukubali utaifa pamoja na Ujamaa. Ujamaa hauwezi kutenganishwa na fikra yake ya kimaada, kwani hautakuwa na tija wala athari. Wala Ujamaa hauwezi kukubaliwa pamoja na fikra yake ya kimaada, kwa kuwa ni fikra hasi, inayopingana na maumbile ya binadamu (fiTrah). Zaidi ya hayo, kuukubali kungemaanisha kwamba taifa la Kiislamu lingelazimika kuacha ’aqeedah ya Kiislamu. Hatuwezi kukubali Ujamaa na wakati huo huo kuendelea kushikilia upande wa kiroho wa Uislamu. Hilo lingetufanya tusikubali Uislamu wala Ujamaa, kwa sababu ya kwamba yanapingana, na chochote kitakachokubaliwa kitakuwa pungufu. Vivyo hivyo, hatuwezi kukubali mfumo wa Uislamu uliotengwa na ’aqeedah yake ambayo mfumo wake unatokana nayo, kwani hilo lina maana ya kukubali mfumo wa kidhalimu usio na roho. Badala yake, ni lazima tukubali Uislamu kikamilifu pamoja na fundisho lake (’aqeedah) na mifumo yake, na tuutangaze uongozi wake wa kifikra tunapoeneza da’wah yake.

It is dangerous to adopt nationalism in conjunction with Socialism. Socialism cannot be separated from its materialist idea, because it will not be productive or influential. Neither can Socialism be adopted together with its materialistic idea, since it is a negative thought, which contradicts with man's nature (fiTrah). Furthermore, its adoption would mean that the Islamic nation would have to abandon the Islamic ’aqeedah. We cannot adopt Socialism and simultaneously retain the spiritual aspect of Islam. This would result in adopting neither Islam nor Socialism, by virtue of the fact that they contradict each other and whatever was adopted would be incomplete. Similarly, we cannot adopt the system of Islam devoid of its ’aqeedah from which its system emanates as this means the adoption of an imperious system devoid of spirit. Instead, we must adopt Islam wholly with its doctrine (’aqeedah) and systems and convey its intellectual leadership when we carry the da’wah for it.

Kwa hiyo, kuna njia moja tu ya kupata uamsho wetu, nayo ni kurejea kwenye mtindo wa maisha ya Kiislamu, na hakuna njia ya kurejea kwenye mtindo wa maisha ya Kiislamu isipokuwa kwa kuanzisha Dola ya Kiislamu. Hili haliwezi kufikiwa isipokuwa tukiukubali Uislamu kikamilifu, kama 'aqeedah, ambayo hutatua tatizo kubwa zaidi na ambayo mtazamo wa mwanadamu katika maisha haya umejikita juu yake, na kama mfumo, unaotokana na itikadi hii ('aqeedah). Msingi wa mifumo hiyo ni Kitabu cha Allah (SWT) na Sunnah ya Mtume Wake ﷺ. Hazina zake za kitamaduni ni: fiqh, hadith, tafsiri, lugha ya Kiarabu na nyinginezo. Hakuna mbinu inayoweza kufikia hili isipokuwa kwa kuibeba uongozi wa kifikra wa Kiislamu kikamilifu kupitia da'wah ya Uislamu na kuuanzisha Uislamu kikamilifu kila mahali. Mara uongozi wa kifikra utakapokabidhiwa kwa taifa zima na kwa Dola ya Kiislamu, tutaanza kuupeleka uongozi wa kifikra duniani.

Accordingly, there is only one way to attain our revival which is the resumption of the Islamic way of life and there is no way to resume the Islamic way of life except through establishing the Islamic State. This cannot be achieved unless we totally adopt Islam both as an ’aqeedah, which solves the greatest problem and upon which man's viewpoint in this life is concentrated and as a system, which emanates from this doctrine (’aqeedah). The basis of such systems is the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw). Its cultural treasures are the: fiqh, hadith, tafseer, Arabic language and others. No method can achieve this except by carrying the Islamic intellectual leadership completely through the da’wah to Islam and establishing Islam completely everywhere. Once the intellectual leadership has been transmitted to the nation as a whole and to the Islamic State, we embark upon carrying the intellectual leadership to the world.

Hii ndiyo njia pekee ya kufikia mwamko: kuwakabidhi Waislamu uongozi wa kifikra wa Kiislamu ili waweze kurejea katika mfumo wa maisha ya Kiislamu, kisha kuufikisha kwa binadamu wote kupitia Dola ya Kiislamu baadaye.

This is the only way to achieve the revival: to convey the Islamic intellectual leadership to Muslims so as to resume the Islamic way of life and to deliver it to all of mankind by means of the Islamic State thereafter.