伊斯兰的思想领导与人的天性(fiTrah)相契合。尽管其义理深邃,却易于理解。人的心灵与理智很快就会向它敞开,急切地去领会它,并满怀赞赏地思索其中的细节。这是因为宗教情感是人与生俱来的。每个人生来都有宗教性,任何力量都无法从他身上夺去这种天性(fiTrah),因为它深深扎根于他的内心。人天生感到自己是不完整的,感到有一种更伟大的力量值得被尊崇。人的宗教本能,就是从其天然的软弱中产生的、对造物主与安排者的需要。这种宗教本能是恒常的,并有其特定的表现形式,即尊崇(taqdees)。因此,人类是有宗教性的,历史上始终崇拜着某种事物。人类崇拜过人、星辰、石头、动物、火以及其他事物。然而,伊斯兰以其教义引导人远离对受造物的崇拜,转向对创造万物的真主(SWT)的崇拜。唯物主义意识形态的出现,否认真主(SWT)的存在以及人与祂(SWT)之间的关系,却未能终结这种与生俱来的宗教性。然而,它改变了人对于超越自身之力量的观念,以及对这一力量的尊崇。它把这一切转移到人身上,并使人的尊崇仅指向人自身。这仿佛是倒退了,把人们的尊崇从崇拜真主(SWT)转向崇拜仆人(真主的仆人),从尊重真主(SWT)的天启(ayat)转向尊重受造者的言论。在这一点上,它是倒退的。它无法消除宗教的天性(fiTrah),反而以欺骗的方式将其倒退转移。因此,唯物主义意识形态(共产主义)的思想领导是一种消极的领导,它与人的天性相悖。 因此，从这个角度看，它是一种失败。它只是通过诉诸人们的肚子来操纵民众。它吸引的是穷人、胆怯者和失败者。信奉它的人，是思想低下的人、生活中的失败者、怨恨生活的人，以及心怀诡计、想要以“知识分子”自居、高谈辩证法理论的人；而这一理论的虚妄与腐败，无论从理智还是现实来看都一目了然。它诉诸武力，以强迫人们接受其意识形态。因此，压迫、镇压、无政府状态、动荡、破坏和不稳定，是它最重要的工具。

The intellectual leadership of Islam agrees with man's nature (fiTrah). In spite of its depth it is easily understood. One's heart and mind are quickly opened to it, eagerly trying to understand it and pondering over its details with appreciation. This is because religiousness is instinctive in man. Every man is religious by his nature and no power can remove from him this nature (fiTrah), because it is deeply rooted in him. Man, by nature, feels that he is incomplete and that there is a greater power which deserves to be sanctified. Man's instinct of religiousness is the need for the Creator the Organiser that arises from his natural weakness. This instinct of religiousness is constant and has a specific manifestation, which is the sanctification (taqdees). Consequently, mankind is religious and has always worshipped something throughout history. Humanity has worshipped man, planets, stones, animals, fire and other things. Islam, however, with its doctrine came to lead man away from worshipping created things to the worship of Allah (swt) who created everything. The advent of the materialistic ideology, which denies the existence of Allah (swt) and our relationship with Him (swt), could not put an end to this innate religiousness. However, it shifted man's conception of power greater than himself and of his sanctification of this power. It shifted all that to conceiving this power in men and made his sanctification to them alone. It is as if it went backward, and shifted people's sanctification from worshipping Allah (swt) to worshipping the servants (of Allah), away from venerating the ayat of Allah (swt) to venerating the words of the created. So it was backward in that regard. It could not eliminate the nature (fiTrah) of religiousness; it rather, deceitfully shifted it backward. Therefore, the intellectual leadership of the materialistic ideology (Communism) is a negative leadership, which disagrees with man's nature. Therefore it is a failure from this perspective. It only manipulates the people through appealing to their stomach. It attracts the poor, the scared and the defeated ones. Those who adhere to it are those low in their thinking, the failures in life and resentful of it and those mentally devious who aspire to be known as intellectuals when they chatter about the theory of dialectics whose falsehood and corruption are so visible by both the intellect and reality. It resorts to force to subjugate people to its ideology. Hence, oppression, suppression, anarchy, turmoil, destruction and instability are its most important instruments.

资本主义的思想领导地位同样与人的天性(fiTrah)相悖,即虔信的本能。这是因为虔信的本能既体现在对神圣之事的敬奉上,也体现在对人生事务的治理上。当人独自承担这种治理时,矛盾与不一致便会出现,这证明了人的无能为力。因此,dīn(从造物主降示的教法)必须来管理人生的事务。由此可见,将dīn与生活分离,便与人的天性(fiTrah)相矛盾。dīn在生活中的存在,并不意味着把生活的各项职能变成宗教仪式,而是意味着让真主(swt)所制定的制度来解决人生的问题。这一制度源于'aqeedah(信仰),而'aqeedah与人的天性(fiTrah)相吻合。若废除这一制度,代之以源于一种与虔信本能相悖的信条的制度,便是与人的天性(fiTrah)相悖。因此,资本主义的思想领导在本能(fiTriy)层面上是失败的,因为它是一种消极的领导:它将dīn与生活分离,把虔信逐出生活,使其成为纯粹的个人事务,并将真主(swt)所制定的、用以解决人类问题的制度排除在外。

The Capitalistic intellectual leadership likewise disagrees with man's nature (fiTrah) i.e. the instinct of religiousness. This is because the instinct of religiousness manifests itself in sanctification as well as in management of man's affairs in life. The inconsistency and contradictions appear when man undertakes this management; testifying to man's inability. Consequently, the deen (revealed from the Creator) must manage man's affairs in life. Thus the separation of the deen from life contradicts man's nature (fiTrah). The presence of the deen in life does not mean making the functions of life religious rites. Rather, the presence of the deen in life means making the system that Allah (swt) ordained, solve man's problems in life. This system emanates from the ‘aqeedah, which agrees with man's nature (fiTrah). Removing this system and replacing it with a system which emanates from a creed that disagrees with the instinct of religiousness disagrees with man's nature (fiTrah). Therefore, the intellectual leadership of Capitalism fails from the instinctive (fiTriy) aspect because it is a negative one, for it separates the deen from life, banishes religiousness from life and making it an individualistic issue and removes Allah's (swt) system which He ordained, from solving man's problems.

伊斯兰的思想领导是积极的，因为它以理智作为相信真主（swt）存在的基础。它引导人去关注宇宙、人类和生命的各个要素，从而确凿而决定性地确立真主（swt）的存在，即这些事物的创造者。它为人界定了他天性所追求、却既不存在于他自身、也不存在于生命与宇宙之中的至高完美，并引导人的理智去思索这至高（至尊）的力量，以便认识真主的存在并信仰祂。 共产主义的思想领导建立在唯物主义之上，而非建立在理智之上，尽管理智也得出了这一结论。它认为物质先于思想而存在，物质是万物的本源，因此它是唯物主义的。 资本主义的思想领导则不同，它基于一种妥协的方案，这一方案是在教士与知识分子之间经过长达数个世纪的血腥斗争后达成的，其结果便是政教分离的观念，即将宗教（deen）与国家分开。

The Islamic intellectual leadership is positive since it establishes the mind as the basis for the belief in the existence of Allah (swt). It draws man's attention to the elements of the universe, man and life to conclusively and decisively establish the existence of Allah (swt), the Creator of these things. It defines for man the utmost perfection which he innately searches for and does not exist in him, the life, or the universe and directs man's mind to this utmost (Supreme) power so as to realise His existence and believe in Him The Communist intellectual leadership is built upon materialism and not the intellect though the mind concludes it. It considers that matter exists before thought and matter is the origin of all things, hence it is materialistic. The Capitalist intellectual leadership however, is based upon a compromise solution reached after a bloody struggle between the clergy and the intellectuals, which had lasted for many centuries and it resulted with the idea of separation of the deen from the state.

因此，共产主义和资本主义的思想领导层都失败了，因为它们与人的本性（fiTrah）相违背，并且不是建立在理智之上的。

Therefore, both the Communist and Capitalist intellectual leaderships failed since they contradict man's nature (fiTrah) and are not built upon the intellect.

总之,在三种思想领导中,只有伊斯兰的思想领导是正确的,因为它建立在理智之上,它符合人的本性(fiTrah),因此人会积极地回应它。而其他思想领导都是错误的,因为它们不是建立在理智之上,并且违背人的本性(fiTrah)。也就是说,共产主义中的思想领导建立在唯物主义之上,而不是建立在理智之上。这是因为它坚持认为物质先于思维,即先于理智。因此,当物质映照到大脑上时,便在大脑中引发思维,所以大脑是在映照于其上的物质基础上进行思考。在物质映照到大脑之前并不存在思维,因此一切都建立在物质之上。由此可见,共产主义思想领导的根源是物质,而不是思维。

In conclusion, of the three intellectual leaderships, only the Islamic intellectual leadership is correct, because it is built upon the mind, it agrees with man's nature (fiTrah) and, thus man positively responds to it. While the other intellectual leaderships are false because they are not built upon the mind and they disagree with man's nature (fiTrah). That is, the intellectual leadership in communism is built on materialism and not on the mind. This is because it maintains that matter precedes thought i.e. it precedes the mind. Thus when matter is reflected onto the brain it initiates thought in it, so it (the brain) thinks in the matter that was reflected on it. Prior to the reflection of the matter onto the brain there was no thought, and accordingly everything is built upon matter. Consequently, the origin of the Communist intellectual leadership is matter and not thought.

这种观点有两方面的错误。第一，物质与大脑之间不存在反映：既不是大脑反映在物质上，也不是物质反映在大脑上。这是因为反映要求对象本身具有反映的属性，例如镜子，反映才会发生。而大脑和物质都不具备这种属性。因此，物质与大脑之间根本不存在反映，物质既不反映在大脑上，也不被转移到大脑中。确切地说，物质的感觉是通过感官传递到大脑的。物质对大脑的感觉既不是物质在大脑中的反映，也不是大脑在物质上的反映，它只是对物质的感觉。在感知物质方面，视觉与其他感官并无区别。因此，通过嗅觉、听觉、触觉和味觉而产生的感知，与通过视觉产生的感知是一样的。所以，发生的不是大脑上的反映，而是对事物的感知。由此可见，人通过五官感知事物，事物并不会反映在大脑上。

This perspective is wrong for two reasons: The first: There is no reflection between matter and brain; neither the brain is reflected on matter, nor matter is reflected on the brain. This is because reflection requires that objects be endowed with the characteristic of reflection, such as a mirror, for reflection to happen. This characteristic is not possessed by the brain or by the matter. Therefore, there is no reflection at all between matter and the brain, because matter is not reflected on the brain, nor is it transferred to it. Rather, the sensation of the matter is transferred to the brain through the senses. The sensation of matter to the brain is not a reflection of matter to the brain, nor a reflection of the brain to matter; it is only the sensation of matter. In this regard there is no difference between sight and the other senses in the sensing of matter. Thus sensation occurs by smelling, hearing, touching and tasting as it occurs by seeing. Therefore, what happens is not reflection on the brain but rather it is sensation of the things. Accordingly, man senses things through his five senses and things are not reflected on the brain.

第二：仅凭感觉并不能产生思维，它只产生感觉，即对有形事物的感觉。感觉加感觉，再加上一百万次感觉，仍然只会产生感觉，而不会产生任何思维。要使人能够思考，他必须拥有先前的信息，借助这些信息来解释所感知的事物。例如，如果把一本古叙利亚语的书交给一个对叙利亚语毫无先前了解的人，并让他的所有感官都接触这本书，通过视觉和触觉，并且重复一百万次，他仍然无法理解书中的任何一个词，除非他获得了有关叙利亚语的相应信息。此后，他才会开始思考和理解。再举另一个例子：一个感官健全但没有任何先前信息的孩子。如果我们把一块金子、一块黄铜和一块石头放在孩子面前，让他的所有感官都去感知这些东西，无论这种感知如何多样、重复多少次，孩子都无法理解它们。然而，如果给予孩子关于它们的先前信息，他就会运用这些信息来理解它们。假如这个孩子长到二十岁仍然没有任何信息，那么无论大脑在生理上如何发育，他仍将停留在出生第一天的状态。因为使人能够理解的，不是大脑本身，而是先前的信息，加上大脑和所感知的对象。至于本能行为，与人类的理智过程不同，它仅仅是对本能和机体需求的一种反应，这一现象既发生在动物身上，也发生在人身上。例如，通过反复给婴儿苹果和石头，婴儿便会认识到苹果可以吃，而石头不能吃。同样，驴子也会认识到大麦可以食用，而泥土不能。 这种区分并非通过思维或理智而产生，而是通过对本能和机体需求的回应而产生，这些本能和需求既存在于动物身上，也存在于人身上。因此，除非先前的信息与被感知之物经由感官传递至大脑相结合，否则思维便无从产生。

The second: Sensation alone does not produce thought, but merely produces sensation i.e. a sensation of the tangible object. Sensation, plus sensation, plus a million sensations will still only produce a sensation and no thought at all. In order for man to think, he must have previous information through which he can explain the sensed matter. For example, if a book in the ancient Syriac language was given to someone who has no previous information about the Syriac language, and all his senses were made to fall on the book, by sight and touch, and this was repeated a million times, he still would not be able to understand a single word of the book unless he is given the relevant information about the Syriac language. Thereafter, he will start thinking and understanding. Let us take another example of a child with sound senses but with no previous information. If we were to place in front of the child a piece of gold, brass and a stone and make all his senses, sense these things the child would not be able to comprehend them, no matter how much this sensation was diversified and repeated. However, if the child was given previous information about them, he would use this information to comprehend them. Were the child to grow up to be twenty years of age without any information he would remain as his first day of life, regardless of the biological growth in the brain. Since it is not the brain that enables man to comprehend, rather it is the previous information together with the brain and the sensed object. As for the instinctual behaviour, in contrast to the intellectual process in man, it results as a mere response to the instincts and organic needs, a matter, which occurs with animals as well as man. For example, a baby recognises through giving him an apple and stone repeatedly, that the apple can be eaten while the stone cannot. Likewise, the donkey recognises that barley is edible but soil is not. This differentiation occurs not through thought or intellect, but through the response to the instincts and the organic needs, which are present in animals and man. Thus thought cannot be produced unless previous information is coupled with the transference of the sensed thing through the senses to the brain.

因此,心智、理智或理解可以被定义为:感官所感知的对象经由感官传递至大脑,并且存在一种先前已有的信息,借此来解释这一实在。

Accordingly, the mind, intellect, or comprehension can be defined as the transmission of a sensed object through the senses to the brain and the existence of previous information by which this reality is explained.

因此，共产主义知识分子的领导既是虚假的，也是错误的，因为它并非建立在理性之上，而且它对思想与心智的理解本身就是错误的。

Therefore, the Communist intellectual leadership is both false and incorrect, because it is not built upon the mind and the meaning of the thought and mind in its understanding is false.

资本主义的思想领导地位建立在一种妥协方案之上，这一妥协是神职人员与知识分子在持续多个世纪的血腥冲突之后达成的。这一妥协方案就是将宗教（deen）与生活分离，即在默认承认宗教的同时，把它从生活中剥离出去。因此，资本主义的思想领导并非建立在理性（mind）之上，而是建立在这一妥协方案之上。的确，妥协的观念深深植根于资本主义者之中，他们使真理（haqq）向虚妄（baTil）靠拢，使信仰（imaan）向不信（Kufr）靠拢，使光明（nur）向黑暗（DHalam）靠拢。然而，事实上并不存在这种妥协方案，因为事情要么是真理，要么是虚妄；要么是信仰，要么是不信；要么是光明，要么是黑暗。他们所建立的学说与思想领导所依据的这种妥协，使他们偏离了真理、信仰和光明。因此，这种思想领导并非建立在理性之上，所以它是虚假的。

The Capitalist intellectual leadership is built on a compromise solution agreed upon by the clergy and the intellectuals after their bloody conflict which lasted for many centuries. This compromised solution is the separation of the deen from life i.e., the implicit acknowledgement of the deen while separating it from life. Thus, the Capitalist intellectual leadership is not built on the mind, it is rather based on this compromise solution. Indeed, the idea of a compromise is deeply rooted in the Capitalists who draw the truth (haqq) near to the falsehood (baTil) and imaan near to Kufr, the light (nur) near the dark (DHalam). This is despite the fact that the compromise solution does not exist because the matter is either the haqq or the baTil, imaan or Kufr and light or darkness.The compromise on which they have built their doctrine and intellectual leadership has made them swerve from the truth, the iman and the light. Therefore, this intellectual leadership is not built on the mind thus it is false.

然而，伊斯兰教义是建立在理智之上的，因为它要求穆斯林通过理性来相信安拉（SWT）的存在、穆罕默德（ﷺ）的先知身份以及《古兰经》。它要求穆斯林相信“嘿布”（超乎感官的事物），但前提是这些事物见于经过理性确证的来源，例如《古兰经》或“穆塔瓦提尔”圣训。因此，伊斯兰信仰立足于理智。这是从理性角度而言的。 然而，就人的本性（菲During fiṭrah）而言，伊斯兰学术界的领袖们认同人的本性，因为伊斯兰教承认宗教的存在、宗教在生活中的必要性，以及依照安拉（SWT）的命令与禁令安排生活的义务。宗教性是人天生具有的（fiṭriy），因为它是人的本能之一，有其自身的反应，即崇敬与圣化，这是对某种特定本能的自然反应，有别于其他本能的各种反应。因此，对宗教的信仰以及依照安拉（SWT）的命令与禁令生活的义务是出于本能的。它符合人的本性（fiṭrah），因而对人产生积极的回应。

However, the Islamic doctrine is built upon the mind, because it obliges the Muslim to believe in the existence of Allah (swt), in the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw) and the Qur'an, through the use of the mind. It obliges the Muslim to believe in the ghaib, (things beyond the senses) on the condition that it is mentioned in a source which was conclusively proven rationally like the Qur'an or hadith mutawatir. Thus, the Islamic creed is based upon the intellect. This is from the rational perspective. However with regards to man's nature (fiTrah), the Islamic intellectual leadership agrees with man's nature (fiTrah) since it recognises the existence of deen, its necessity in life and the obligation to manage life according to the commands and prohibitions of Allah (swt). Religiousness is innate (fiTriy) in man since it is one of man's instincts with its own response, namely sanctification, which is a natural response to a specific instinct that differs from all the other responses of other instincts. Thus, the belief in deen and the obligation to live according to the commands and prohibitions of Allah (swt) is instinctive. It agrees with man's nature (fiTrah) and therefore responds positively to man.

这与共产主义和资本主义的领导层不同，它们各自都与人的天性（فِطْرَة，fiTrah）相悖。共产主义的思想领导层彻底否认宗教（دِين，deen）的存在，并反对承认宗教，因此它与人的天性（fiTrah）相矛盾。资本主义的思想领导层既不承认也不否认宗教，它并不把承认或否认宗教作为讨论的议题。然而，它坚持将宗教与生活相分离，主张生活应当依据利益来安排，与宗教无关，因此它同样与人的天性（fiTrah）相矛盾。这种做法有悖于天性（fiTrah），且与天性相距甚远。

This differs from the Communist and the Capitalistic leaderships, each of which disagrees with man's nature (fiTrah). The Communist intellectual leadership denies the existence of deen absolutely and opposes its recognition. Accordingly, it contradicts man's nature (fiTrah). The Capitalist intellectual leadership neither recognises nor denies deen. It does not make the recognition or denial of deen an issue for discussion. However, it insist on the separation of deen from life and advocates that life be managed according to benefit with no relation to deen. Therefore, it contradicts man's nature (fiTrah). This disagrees with the nature (fiTrah) and stands far away from it.

因此,伊斯兰的思想领导是唯一正确的思想领导,因为它符合人的天性与理智;其他一切思想领导都是错误的。由此可见,伊斯兰的思想领导是唯一正确且成功的思想领导。

The Islamic intellectual leadership therefore, is the only correct intellectual leadership because it agrees with man's nature and mind; all other intellectual leaderships are false. Accordingly, the Islamic intellectual leadership is the only correct and successful intellectual leadership.

还有一个问题仍然存在：穆斯林是实施了伊斯兰，还是只信奉了它的教义，同时却在实施其他制度和法律？对此问题的回答是：从真主的使者ﷺ抵达麦地那直至公历1918年即伊历1336年伊斯兰国在殖民主义的打击下崩溃，穆斯林在整个各个时代都只实施了伊斯兰。穆斯林对伊斯兰的实施是全面的，而其全面实施所取得的成功是十分显著的。

One question remains: Did the Muslims implement Islam, or did they only embrace its doctrine while implementing other systems and laws? The answer to this question is that Muslims implemented only Islam through all the ages from the arrival of Rasool Allah to Madinah until 1336 A.H i.e. 1918 C.E when the Islamic State collapsed at the hands of colonialism. The Muslims implementation of Islam was comprehensive and its success in their comprehensive implementation was overwhelming.

伊斯兰教的具体实施由两个主体承担，他们负有实施这一制度的责任，即：负责裁决人与人之间纠纷的法官，以及治理民众的统治者。 经由历代相传（tawatur）的记载可知，从先知（愿主福安之）时代直至伊斯坦布尔哈里发制度终结，裁决人们之间纠纷的法官，在一切事务上都依照伊斯兰教法（Shari'ah）的规定裁决。无论纠纷发生在穆斯林之间，还是穆斯林与非穆斯林之间，皆是如此。负责裁决侵权、家庭事务、刑事诉讼等纠纷的法院，都隶属于唯一一个以伊斯兰教法为基础的法院体系。从未有人记载说，哪怕一个案件是依照伊斯兰教法规则以外的法律裁决的，在殖民主义的持续影响下，法院被划分为沙里亚法院与民事法院之前，伊斯兰国家中也从未有任何一家法院以伊斯兰教法之外的律法审判。 对此最明确的证据，保存在耶路撒冷、巴格达、大马士革、开罗和伊斯坦布尔等古城的沙里亚法院记录之中。这些记录确凿地证明，法官实施的只有伊斯兰教法。甚至连非穆斯林也会研习和撰写伊斯兰教法学，例如撰写《迈季莱注释》（al-Majallah）的撒利姆·阿尔-巴兹（Saleem al-Baz）。 国家走向覆灭时所颁布的法律，是基于学者的教法裁决（fatwa）而推行的，认为这些法律不与伊斯兰教法的律例相抵触。因此，奥斯曼刑法典于伊历1275年（公元1857年）颁行实施，《权利与商业法》于伊历1276年（公元1858年）颁行。随后，在伊历1288年（公元1870年），法院被一分为二：沙里亚法院与官方法院，并颁布法令安排这一划分。伊历1295年（公元1877年），颁布法律规范成文法院。伊历1296年…… 1878年（公元）颁布了《权利与刑罚程序》。由于乌莱玛（ulema）认为没有任何理由采用民法，该法被搁置，随后于1286年伊历（1868年公元）颁布了伊斯兰法典《迈季莱》（al-Majallah），作为交易事务的准则。所有这些法典都被作为伊斯兰所允许的规则颁布，而且正如颁布法典的诏令中明确说明的那样，只有在颁发教法裁决（fatwa）允许其施行，并经过伊斯兰教长（Sheikh al-Islam）许可之后，才得以实行。自1918年（公元）起，殖民主义当局占领了一些伊斯兰土地，并依照非伊斯兰法律处理民事纠纷。然而，那些未被殖民军队实际占领、尽管受其影响的国家，如阿富汗以及阿拉伯半岛的汉志、内志和科威特，直到近期仍在司法上依照伊斯兰教法进行统治，尽管这些国家的统治者如今已不再施行伊斯兰教法。因此，我们看到，在伊斯兰国家的各个时代，伊斯兰教法都在司法中得到施行，司法中从未适用过其他法律。

The practical implementation of Islam is undertaken by two entities having the responsibility to implement the system. They are: The judge who is responsible for settling disputes between people, and the ruler who governs the people. It has been narrated through successive reports (tawatur) that the judges who settled the disputes between people from the time of the Messenger (saw) till the demise of the Khilafah in Istanbul, settled the disputes in all affairs with the laws of the Shari’ah. This is whether the disputes were between Muslims or between Muslims and non-Muslims. The courts that settled disputes, such as infringement of rights, family matters, criminal prosecution, etc. were under one single court based on the Islamic Shari’ah only. No one ever reported that even one case had been settled according to other than the Islamic Shari’ah rules or even one court in the Islamic countries has ever judged with other than Islam before the courts were divided into shar’ai and nizami (civil) under the regular influence of colonialism. The clearest proof of this is contained in the records of the shar’ai courts preserved in the old cities of Jerusalem, Baghdad, Damascus, Cairo and Istanbul etc. These records are a conclusive proof that only the Shari’ah was implemented by the judges. Even non-Muslims used to study and write Islamic fiqh like Saleem al-Baz, who wrote a commentary on al-Majallah. Laws that were introduced towards the demise of the state, were introduced on the basis of the scholars fatwa that such laws do not contradict the AHkam Shari’ah. Consequently, the 'Uthmani penal code was introduced for application in 1275 A.H (1857 C.E.) and the Law of Rights and Trade was introduced in 1276 A.H (1858 C.E). This was followed in 1288 A.H (1870 C.E) by dividing of the courts into two: Shari’ah courts and official law courts and a decree was passed to arrange this division. In 1295 A.H (1877 C.E) a law was issued to regulate statuary courts. In 1296 A.H (1878 C.E) the Rights and Penalties Procedure was issued. Since the 'ulema'a did not find any justification to use the civil law, it was put aside and the Shari’ah magazine (al-Majallah) was issued in 1286 A.H (1868 C.E.) as a canon for transactions. All these canons were issued as rules permitted by Islam and were not enacted except, as clearly spelled out in the decrees introducing the canons, after a fatwa was given to allow them and after being permitted by the Sheikh al-Islam. The colonialist authorities since 1918 C.E. have occupied some Islamic lands and were settling disputes over the civil cases according to non-Islamic laws. Whereas, those countries which were not physically occupied by colonialist armies, although they are under its influence, continued to rule judicially according to Islam until recently, such as Afghanistan and the Arabian peninsula i.e. Hijaz, Najd and Kuwait, though the rulers in these countries no longer implement Islam. Accordingly, we observe that Islam was implemented judicially and no other law was applied in the judiciary throughout all the ages of the Islamic State.

统治者对伊斯兰教的实施，体现在与五个领域相关的伊斯兰教法（Ahkam Shar'iyyah）之中：社会、经济、教育、外交和统治。这些与上述事务相关的教法，全部由国家来实施。 社会制度界定了男女之间的关系，以及由此关系引发的各种事务，即个人身份状况（personal status）。即便在伊斯兰土地上存在殖民势力、且统治者行的是kufr（不信）之治，社会制度中依然只适用伊斯兰教法，而没有实施任何其他制度。 至于经济制度，它体现在两个方面：第一，国家征收公共收入以料理民众事务的方式；第二，这些收入的支出方式。就征收收入而言，国家依法征收对货币、土地和牲畜应缴纳的天课（zakat），天课作为一种义务性的功修，只分配给《古兰经》中所提到的八类人。国家从未将天课基金用于支付其开支。国家依照伊斯兰教法筹集其所需的开支资金：因此，它对土地征收哈拉只税（kharaj），向非穆斯林征收人头税（jizyah），并以其作为国内外贸易监管者的身份征收关税。国家只依照伊斯兰教法征集资金。 至于资金的分配，国家设有为残疾人提供经济资助的纳法嘎（nafaqah）制度；将safeeh（无行为能力者）和mubaddir（挥霍于非法之事者）置于监护之下；并在每座城市及通往朝觐之路沿途设立旅舍，以救济贫困者、穷困者和旅行者。这些遗迹至今仍可在主要的穆斯林城市中见到。国家的支出完全以伊斯兰教法为唯一准则，不受任何其他制度支配。 任何在此领域中可能被注意到的缺陷，都是由于疏忽和误用所致，而非由于未能实施伊斯兰教法（shar'a）。

The implementation of Islam by the ruler is represented in AHkam Sharai'ah related to five areas: social, economics, education, foreign affairs and ruling. The AHkam Sharai'ah relating to these matter were all implemented by the state. The social system defines the relationship between men and women and the matters that arise as a result of this relationship i.e. personal status. Alone the Shari’ah is still applied in the social system in spite of the presence of the colonial powers in the Islamic lands and the presence of Kufr ruling; definitely no other system has been implemented. Concerning the economic system, it is represented in two ways, firstly the way in which the state collects public revenue in order to look after the peoples affairs, secondly, the way in which this revenue is spent. As far as collecting revenue is concerned, the State collects the zakat due on money, land and livestock as an obligatory worship and is exclusively distributed amongst the eight categories mentioned in the Qur'an. The State never used the zakat fund for managing its expenditures. The State collected the necessary funds for its expenditures according to the Shari’ah. Thus, it collected kharaj over the land, jizyah from non-Muslims, and customs duties in its capacity as the supervisor over internal and external trade. The State did not collect funds except according to the Shari’ah. As for funds distribution, the state had a nafaqah system (financial support) for the disabled, placed the safeeh (incompetent) and mubaddir (the one who spends his wealth on haram) under guardianship and established lodgings in every city and along the roads to the pilgrimage to assist the poor, destitute and the travellers. These relics can still be seen in major Muslim cities. The State's expenditure was solely governed by the Shari’ah and by no other system. Any deficiency that may be noticed in this field was due to negligence and misapplication and not due to the absence of (shar’a) implementation.

教育政策的基础是伊斯兰的，伊斯兰文化构成课程的根基。凡是与伊斯兰相抵触的外国文化，都会加以谨慎地避免引入。奥斯曼帝国衰落之际在兴办学校方面的怠慢，是当时所有伊斯兰国家的通病，原因在于智识的衰退，而那一时期的衰退已降至最低点。在伊斯兰国家的其他各个时代，人所共知，只有伊斯兰的土地才是学者和学生所向往的圣地（qiblah）。科尔多瓦、巴格达、大马士革、亚历山大和开罗的大学，对全世界教育的进程产生了极大的影响。

The foundation of the educational policy was Islamic and the Islamic culture constituted the basis of the curriculum. Care was exercised to ensure that foreign culture was not adopted if it contradicted Islam. The neglect in opening schools towards the demise of the Ottoman state was typical of all the Islamic countries at that time, due to the intellectual decline which reached its lowest level in that period. In all the other ages of the Islamic State, it was well known that only the Islamic land was the qiblah of the scholars and students. The universities in Cordoba, Baghdad, Damascus, Alexandria and Cairo had a tremendous effect on the course of education throughout the world.

伊斯兰国的对外政策建立在伊斯兰教之上。伊斯兰国与其他所有国家的关系都以伊斯兰教为基础,其他所有国家也都以伊斯兰国的身份与其交往。它的一切对外关系都以伊斯兰教和穆斯林的利益为依据。世人皆知,伊斯兰国的对外政策是一种伊斯兰的政策,以至于无需任何证据来证明。

The foreign policy of the Islamic State was founded upon Islam. The Islamic State built its relationship with all other states on the basis of Islam and all other states dealt with it as an Islamic State. All of its external relationships were based on Islam and the interest of Muslims. It is known all over the world that the foreign policy of the Islamic State was an Islamic policy, to the extent that no evidence is required.

关于治理体系,伊斯兰国家的结构建立在八根支柱之上:哈里发,即国家元首;哈里发的授权辅佐官(Mo'aawen TafweeD);哈里发的执行辅佐官(Mo'aawen Tanfeedh);圣战领袖(Ameer of Jihad);总督(Wulah);法官(QuDah);国家各部门;以及国家议会(Majlis al-Ummah)。这一结构始终存在,穆斯林从未没有哈里发,直到穆斯塔法·凯末尔之手,异教徒(Kafir)殖民势力于伊历1342年(公元1924年)废除了哈里发制度。在被废除之前,穆斯林的哈里发一直连续存在。每当哈里发去世或被罢免,便有另一人继任,即使在衰落时期也是如此。由于伊斯兰国家即是哈里发,这意味着只要哈里发存在,伊斯兰国家就存在。至于他的治理与执行辅佐官,他们在每个时代都存在,是辅佐者而非wazir(大臣)。尽管在阿拔斯时期他们被称为wazir,但他们只是辅佐者,完全不具备民主制度中大臣(wazir)的权限,而是经哈里发授权协助治理与执行,所有执行权力都掌握在哈里发手中。总督(wulah)、法官(quDah)和国家各部门的存在是显而易见的。当异教徒占领土地时,其所有事务仍在运行,其中仍有总督、法官和国家各部门,这一点不需要任何证据。至于圣战领袖,他以伊斯兰军队的身份在世界各地管理军队事务,众所周知,这支军队从未战败。关于国家议会(Majlis al-Ummah),在正统哈里发时代之后,人们对其存在并未给予太多关注。原因在于,它是治理结构的一部分,但不是其支柱之一。 协商（舒拉）是民众对哈里发所享有的权利之一。因此，如果他忽视这一权利，就是失职，但统治制度仍然是伊斯兰的。这是因为伊斯兰中的协商（舒拉）是为了征求意见，而不是为了统治。这与民主制度中的议会制度相反。因此，很明显，伊斯兰的统治制度得到了实行。

With regards to the ruling system, the structure of the state in Islam is established upon eight pillars: the Khaleefah, i.e., the head of State, the Khaleefah's delegated assistants (Mo'aawen TafweeD), the Khaleefah’s executing assistants (Mo'aawen Tanfeedh), the Ameer of Jihad, the Governors (Wulah), the Judges (QuDah)), state departments, and the state assembly (Majlis al-Ummah). This structure existed and Muslims have never been without a Khaleefah until at the hands of Mustapha Kemal, the disbelieving (Kafir) colonial powers abolished the Khilafah in 1342 A.H (1924 C.E). The existence of a Khaleefah for the Muslims, prior to its removal, had been continuous. Whenever a Khaleefah died or was removed, he was succeeded by another, even during the era of decline. Since the Islamic State is the Khaleefah, it means that when a Khaleefah is present the Islamic State exists. As for his assistants in ruling and execution they were present in all ages and were assistants and not wazirs. Although, they were named wazirs during the 'Abbassid era they were assistants and did not possess the capacity of ministers (wazirs) present in the democratic system at all, they were rather assistants in ruling and execution by authorisation from the Khaleefah, while all the executive powers were in the hands of the Khaleefah. The existence of the governors (wulah), judges (quDah) and state departments was obvious. When the kuffar occupied the lands, all their affairs had been running and there were therein governors, judges and state departments, a matter that does not need any evidence. As for the ameer of jihad, he used to run the affairs of the army in its capacity as an Islamic army all over the world, it was known to be undefeated. With regards to the Majlis al-Ummah, after the era of the Khulafaa ar-Rashidun, its existence was not given much attention. The reason for that is that it is one of the ruling structure but not one of its pillars. Shura is one of the rights of the people upon the Khaleefah. Thus, if he neglects it he would be negligent, but the ruling system would still remain Islamic. This is because the shura (consultation) in Islam is for seeking the opinion and not for ruling. This is contrary to the parliamentary system in democracy. Therefore, it is clear that the Islamic ruling system was applied.

关于对哈里发的效忠（bai'ah，誓约）可能会产生一个问题。确定的事实是，哈里发制度中并不存在世袭制度。换言之，国家并未确立世袭制度，即不存在像君主制那样通过世袭来取得国家领导权的统治方式。相反，在某些时代，国家的领导权是通过接受穆斯林的效忠而取得的；在后来的时代，则是通过接受有影响力的人（ahle al-halli wal-'aqd，解与缚者）的效忠；而在国家走向衰亡时，则是通过伊斯兰教长（Sheikh al-Islam）的效忠。在伊斯兰国家的各个时代，程序都是：没有哈里发在未接受效忠的情况下被任命。从未有过任何一次记载表明，哈里发是在未接受效忠的情况下通过继承而被任命的。 然而，尽管如此，取得效忠的方式仍曾被误用。因此，哈里发会在自己去世之前，为其儿子、兄弟、堂兄弟或家族中的其他人向民众取得效忠；哈里发去世后，便为该人更新效忠。这是对效忠的误用，但它既不构成世袭统治，也不构成王位继承。同样，在议会制或民主制中，选举的误用仍被称为选举，而不是任命，即便政府支持的候选人在选举中获胜也是如此。因此，必须承认，伊斯兰制度在伊斯兰国家的各个时期都得到了实施。

A question may arise concerning the bai’ah (pledge) to the Khaleefah. It is an established fact that there was no hereditary system in the Khilafah. In other words, the hereditary system was not established in the state, by which ruling i.e. the state leadership was acquired as is the case in the monarchy. Instead, the State leadership would be acquired through receiving the bai’ah from the Muslims in some eras, from the influential people (ahle al-halli wal-'aqd) in later eras or as what occurred towards the demise of the state from the Sheikh al-Islam. Throughout the ages of the Islamic State, the procedure was that no Khaleefah was appointed without receiving bai’ah. Never was a single incident reported that the Khaleefah was appointed through inheritance without receiving bai’ah. However, notwithstanding this, the manner of attaining bai’ah was misapplied. Thus, a Khaleefah would take a bai’ah from the people before his death for his son, brother, cousin, or any other individual of the family. After the death of the Khaleefah the bai’ah was renewed for that person. This is a misapplication of the bai’ah but it neither constitutes hereditary rule or succession to the throne. Likewise, the misapplication of the elections in a parliamentary or a democratic system is still called elections and not an appointment even if the government-backed candidates succeed in the elections. Consequently, one must acknowledge that the Islamic system was applied throughout all periods of the Islamic State.

关于伊斯兰思想领导力的实际成就，有两个方面堪称无与伦比。 第一，伊斯兰信仰使所有阿拉伯人从一种低下的智识状态中走出来。此前他们在血腥的家族仇杀与蒙昧无知的黑暗中盲目行事，而伊斯兰的曙光照亮了他们，带来了一个在伊斯兰之光中闪耀的智识复兴时代。这道曙光不仅照耀阿拉伯人，也照遍了全世界。穆斯林纷纷投身于向世界传播伊斯兰的事业，足迹遍及波斯、伊拉克、沙姆地区、埃及和北非。这些民族各自拥有自己的宗教、民族身份、语言、风俗和传统，彼此互不相同：波斯人的民族身份不同于沙姆的罗马人，也不同于埃及的科普特人和北非的柏柏尔人。然而，当他们生活在伊斯兰的统治之下并理解了伊斯兰之后，他们都皈依了它，成为一个民族（乌玛），即伊斯兰乌玛。因此，伊斯兰思想领导力在将这些民族与族群熔铸为一个民族方面所取得的成功是无与伦比的。而这一切，是在当时交通工具只有骆驼、交流手段只有口述与笔书的条件下实现的。

As for the practical success of the Islamic intellectual leadership, it was without parallel particularly in the following two matters: Firstly, the Islamic ideology transferred all of the Arabs from a low level of intellect in which they were acting haphazardly in the darkness of bloody family feuds and ignorance to an age of intellectual revival glittering in the light of Islam whose sunrise was not restricted to the Arabs but prevailed all over the world. Muslims rushed in conveying Islam to the world, putting their hands in the process over Persia, Iraq, the lands of ash-Sham, Egypt and North Africa. Each of these peoples had their own religion, nationality, language, customs and traditions. All were different from one another. The nationality of Persians differed from that of the Romans of Sham, from that of the Copts of Egypt and from that of the Berbers of North Africa. Once they lived under the rule of Islam and understood it, they all embraced it and became one nation (Ummah), the Islamic Ummah. Therefore the success of the Islamic intellectual leadership in melting these peoples and nationalities into one nation was unparalleled. This is in spite of the fact that the means of transportation at the time was the camel and the means of communication was the word of the mouth and the writing of the pen.

然而,"法特ហ"(征服)的真正含义,是移除人们与生俱来的本性(fiTrah)和内心所指引的方向上的有形障碍,使人们能够自由地走向其所指引的道路。正是以这种方式,人们成群结队地进入伊斯兰教。另一方面,对各国进行压迫性的征服(fatH),则会使征服者与被征服者彼此疏离。例如,西方帝国主义对东方的殖民统治持续了数十年,却未取得任何成果。倘若不是因为欺骗性的西方文化的影响,以及其代理人的压迫——这些影响很快就会消失——那么回归伊斯兰教在信仰与制度上的领域,将会快如眨眼。因此,伊斯兰的思想领导在将各个不同的民族锻造为一个伊斯兰乌玛(Ummah)方面所取得的成功,是无与伦比的。尽管殖民者带来了灾难、恶行和腐蚀信仰、毒化思想的阴谋,这些民族至今仍然保持着穆斯林的身份。这些民族将始终作为一个伊斯兰民族(乌玛)延续到末日审判之日。从未发生过任何已经皈依伊斯兰教的民族(或种族群体)叛教的情况。

Al-FatH (conquer), however was to remove by force the physical obstacles to give the people free access towards what their minds and their innate (fiTrah) guides them to. In this manner people entered Islam in masses. On the other hand, the oppressive conquering (fatH) of countries alienates the conquerors from the conquered. For example, the colonisation of the East by Western imperialism lasted for decades without gaining any result. If it was not for the influence of the deceptive Western culture and the oppression of its agents which will soon vanish, then the return to the domain of Islam in its ideology and system would be quicker than the blink of an eye. Accordingly, the success of the Islamic intellectual leadership in forging all the various peoples into one Islamic Ummah is without parallel. These peoples have remained as Muslims to this day, in spite of the colonialists calamities, wickedness and planning in corrupting the creeds and poisoning the thoughts. These people will remain one Islamic nation (Ummah) till the Day of Judgement. It has never happened that any people (or ethnic group) which had embraced Islam have apostatised from it.

至于安达卢西亚(西班牙)的穆斯林,他们遭到宗教裁判所的屠杀,被送上断头台,并被投入刽子手的火炉中焚烧。布哈拉、高加索和突厥斯坦的穆斯林也遭遇了与他们之前的人同样悲惨的命运。这些人皈依伊斯兰教,并成为一个关切维护其艾合拉德(信仰)的乌玛,这一事实证明了伊斯兰知识领导层的成功程度,以及伊斯兰国对伊斯兰教的实践。

As for the Muslims of Andalus (Spain), they were massacred by the Courts of Inquisition, the guillotine and burnt in the ovens of the executioners. The Muslims of Bukhara, the Caucasus and Turkistan met with the same disastrous fate as those before them. The fact that these people embraced Islam and became one Ummah that was concerned to protect her ‘aqeedah, portrays, as evidence the degree of success of the Islamic intellectual leadership and the application of Islam by the Islamic State.

第二点说明了这一思想的成功:伊斯兰民族(Ummah)在文明、物质进步、文化和科学方面曾是世界上的领先民族。从公元七世纪到公元十八世纪中叶的十二个世纪里,伊斯兰国家一直是世界上领先且最强大的国家。在这一时期,它是全球的精华,也是诸民族中冉冉升起的太阳。这一事实证明了这种思想领导力的成功,也证明了伊斯兰在人们中间实施其制度和信仰(‘aqeedah)的成功。当伊斯兰国家和民族放弃承担其思想领导责任,并在理解和运用伊斯兰方面有所欠缺时,它便衰落下去,落后于其他民族。

The second matter, which denotes the success of this ideology, is the fact that the Islamic Ummah was the leading nation in the world in respect to civilisation, material advancement, culture and science. For twelve centuries, dating from the seventh century C.E to the middle of the eighteenth century C.E, the Islamic State remained as the leading and most powerful state in the world. Throughout this period it was the flower of the globe and the rising sun amongst the nations, a fact that confirms the success of this intellectual leadership and the success of Islam in implementing its system and ‘aqeedah upon the people. When the Islamic State and Ummah abandoned carrying its intellectual leadership and fell short in understanding and applying Islam, it lapsed and declined among other nations.

因此，我们说，只有伊斯兰的思想领导才是正确的，也只有它应当被传播到全世界。当承载这一领导的伊斯兰国家建立起来时，这一领导的成功今天将如同从前一样得以实现。

Therefore, we say that only the Islamic intellectual leadership is correct and it alone should be carried to the world. When the Islamic State, which carries this leadership, is established, the success of this leadership will be realised today as it was before.

我们已经证明,伊斯兰及其信仰(ʿaqīdah)以及由此衍生的制度,与人的天性(fiṭrah)相契合。因此,伊斯兰并不把人视为一种如机器般精确运转、依据精细数学尺度毫无差别地执行制度的机械存在。恰恰相反,从伊斯兰的角度看,人是一种社会性的存在,以各不相同的能力和品质来践行这一制度。由此,伊斯兰一方面自然地致力于缩小人与人之间的差距,却并不使所有人完全相同,同时保障所有人的安宁;另一方面,也自然会出现一些偏离制度、因而不遵从它的个体,以及一些不回应或背离这一制度的人。社会中必然会有作恶者(fussāq)、沉溺于罪恶的人(fujjār)、不信者(kuffār)、伪信者(munāfiqūn)、叛教者(murtaddūn)和无神论者(mulḥidūn)。重要的是,从其思想、情感、制度和人员的角度来看,整个社会被视为一个伊斯兰社会,当这些要素以伊斯兰的面貌呈现时,它便是在践行伊斯兰。

We have proven that Islam with its ’aqeedah and it's system, which emanates from it, agrees with man's nature (fiTrah). Consequently, Islam does not view man as a mechanical being functioning accurately like a machine and implementing the system on the basis of fine mathematical measures without disparity. On the contrary, from the Islamic perspective man is a social being who applies the system with varying capabilities and qualities. Thus, it is natural for Islam, on the one hand, to narrow the gap between people without making everyone equal while guaranteeing tranquillity for all. On the other hand, it is also natural to find some individuals who deviate from the system and thus don't comply with it and others who do not respond or who turn away from the system. Inevitably, there will be in the society evildoers (fussaq), people who indulge in vices (fujjar), unbelievers (kuffar), hypocrites (munafiqoon), apostates (murtaddun) and atheists (mulhidoon). The important thing is that the society as a whole, from the point of view of its thoughts, emotions, systems and people, is considered as an Islamic society, which applies Islam when these elements manifest themselves as Islamic.

证据在于：没有人能够将一套制度应用到达到穆罕默德ﷺ所达到的程度。尽管如此，在他ﷺ的时代，同样存在不信者、伪信者、叛教者、无神论者、作恶者以及沉溺于恶行的人。因此，没有人可以声称伊斯兰没有被完整地施行，或者社会不是伊斯兰的。然而，伊斯兰的施行是针对作为社会性存在的人，而非机械性存在的人。

The evidence for this is that it is impossible for anyone to apply a system at the level of Muhammad (saw)'s application. In spite of this, at his (saw)'s time there were also disbelievers, hypocrites, apostates, atheists, evildoers and people who indulged in vices. Therefore, no one can claim that Islam was not applied completely or that the society was non-Islamic. Yet the Islamic application is on man as a social being, not a mechanical being.

伊斯兰教在整个伊斯兰乌玛中持续施行，无论阿拉伯人还是非阿拉伯人，自先知ﷺ定居麦地那之时起，直到殖民列强占领伊斯兰国土，并以资本主义制度取代伊斯兰教为止。

Islam continued to be applied on the entire Islamic Ummah, Arab and non-Arabs, from the time Prophet settled down in Madinah till the colonial powers occupied the Islamic lands and replaced Islam with the Capitalist system.

因此,伊斯兰教从希吉拉历元年起一直施行至伊历1336年(公元1918年),在这段时期内,伊斯兰民族并未施行伊斯兰教以外的任何制度。

Thus, Islam was implemented from the first year of the Hijrah until 1336A.H (1918 C.E) and the Islamic Ummah did not apply any system other than Islam throughout this period.

虽然穆斯林将哲学、科学以及各异域文化的书籍译成了阿拉伯文,但他们从未为研究或应用而翻译过其他民族的任何法律、制度或典章。既然将伊斯兰视为一种制度,有人运用得当,有人则运用失当。这取决于国家的强弱,取决于其对伊斯兰的理解程度或缺乏理解,也取决于其在承担思想领导责任时是积极进取还是安于现状。因此,在某些时代,伊斯兰的运用失当导致了伊斯兰社会的一些衰退,但这是任何制度都无法避免的,因为制度的运行取决于人。然而,运用失当并不意味着伊斯兰未被实施。伊斯兰确实得到了实施,并且没有其他制度或意识形态被采用。这是因为关键在于国家所颁布的典章与制度的实施。就此而言,国家并未采用任何与伊斯兰相异的典章或制度。所发生的只是某些统治者对其部分规则的运用失当。尽管如此,在考察伊斯兰历史上的实施情况时,必须注意两点。第一点是,历史不能取自憎恨伊斯兰的伊斯兰之敌,而应取自穆斯林自身,并经过广泛研究,以免采纳扭曲的图景。第二点是,对社会的概括性研究不应取自个别人物的历史,也不应取自社会的某一个方面。例如,仅凭研究叶齐德时代的历史来评判倭马亚时代的历史,是错误的;或仅凭阿拔斯王朝某些哈里发的若干事件来评判阿拔斯时代的历史,同样是错误的。 同样,我们不应仅凭《歌书》(Kitab al-aghani)来评判阿拔斯时代的社会,该书是为讲述那些肆意奢靡的人、诗人和作家的故事而写的;也不应仅凭阅读苦行(zuhd)之类的书籍,便开始认为整个社会都处于奢靡与罪恶之中,或都处于苦行与遁世之中。相反,我们必须研究整个社会。不过我们必须承认,伊斯兰社会在任何时代作为一个整体的历史从未被完整地记录下来。所记载的主要是统治者和一些官员的事迹。那些撰写此类历史的人并不可靠,他们要么是诽谤者,要么是谄媚者,其所写内容若未经考察,不能被接受。

Although the Muslims translated books of philosophy, science and different foreign cultures into Arabic, they never translated any legislation, system, or canon of other nations neither for research nor for application. Considering Islam to be a system, some people applied it well and others misapplied it. This depended on the strength or weakness of the state and on the degree of its comprehension of Islam or lack of understanding and according to whether it was strong or complacent in carrying its intellectual leadership. Consequently, the misapplication of Islam in some ages brought about some decline in the Islamic society, but this is something, which no system can avoid, because the application of the system depends on human beings. However, the misapplication does not mean that Islam was not implemented. Surely Islam was implemented and no other system or ideology was applied. This is because the crucial point is in the applying of canons and systems enacted by the state. In this respect the state did not adopt any canon or system alien to Islam. What occurred was the misapplication of some of its rules by some rulers. However, notwithstanding this, one must observe two points when examining the implementation of Islam throughout its history. The first point is that history must not be taken from the enemies of Islam who harbour hatred towards it. Instead history must be taken from Muslims themselves after an extensive research so as not to adopt a distorted image. The second point is that the generalisation in study of the society should not be taken from the history of individuals or from one aspect of the society. For example, it would be wrong to pass judgment on the history of Ummayad era by studying the history of Yazid's era. Or to pass judgment on the history of the Abbassid era from some incidents of their Khulafaa. Likewise, we must not pass judgment on the society of the Abbassid era from Kitab al-aghani (book of songs) which was written to narrate the stories of recklessly extravagant people, poets and authors or from reading the books of asceticism (zuhd) and the like and thus start thinking that the entire society was in a state of extravagance and sin or asceticism and isolation. Rather, we have to study the whole society. We have to acknowledge however that the whole history of the Islamic society as a society in any era was never written. What has been written rather is the affairs of the rulers and some officials. Those who wrote such history were not trustworthy, they were either slanderers or adulators and whatever they wrote can't be accepted without investigation.