Al Islami Khelafat's Book 1
Md Sayed Al Islam
21 July, 2023
Introduction
Islam
Iman
jihad
The identity of Allah
The identity of the Holy Prophet Muhammad may peace be upon him
What is Caliphate?
Importance of Caliphate
Establishment of Caliphate
Why did you choose this book?
Reading Rainbow Tip: Was the title interesting? Did the cover spark your curiosity? Was it something else? Talk about why you chose the book to help your classmates understand more about you!
Islam
Islam: Islam means to achieve peace – peace with God, peace within oneself, and peace with the creations of God – through wholly submitting oneself to God and accepting His guidance.
The term Islam derives from the three-letter Arabic root, S (س)- L (ل)- M (م), which generates words with interrelated meanings, including “surrender”, “submission”, “commitment” and “peace”. Commonly, Islam refers to the monotheistic religion revealed to Muhammad ibn (son of) Abdullah between 610 and 632 of the Common Era.
The name Islam was instituted by the Qur’an, the sacred scripture revealed to Muhammad. For believers, Islam is not a new religion. Rather, it represents the last reiteration of the primordial message of God’s Oneness, a theme found in earlier monotheistic religious traditions.
Though Islam can be described as a religion, it is viewed by its adherents – a fifth of the world’s population – in much broader terms. Beyond belief in specific doctrines and performance of important ritual acts, Islam is practiced as a complete and natural way of life, designed to bring God into the center of one’s consciousness, and thus one’s life. Essentially, by definition Islam is a world view focused on belief in the One God and commitment to His commandments.
Iman
Iman: The root of the word “Iman” is a-m-n which means: to be calm and quiet (in one’s heart); to be protected from fear; trustworthiness, and truthfulness [Taj-al-Urus]. Iman means to accept truthfully, to be convinced, and to verify something, to rely upon or have confidence in something.
Iman is usually translated in English as faith or belief, and faith in turn signifies acceptance without proof or argument, without reference to reason or thought, knowledge or insight. According to the Qur’an, Iman is conviction which is based upon reason and knowledge; a conviction that results from full mental acceptance and intellectual satisfaction; the kind of conviction that gives one a feeling of inner contentment and peace. And a Mu’min is one who accepts truth in such a way that it ensures his own peace and helps him to safeguard the peace and security of the rest of humankind. In fact, Al-Mu’min is one of the attributes of Allah Himself (59:23). Allah gives a comprehensive and an objective definition of Iman in the Qur’an: “To believe in Allah, and in the hereafter, and in Malaika (angels or Allah’s forces), and in the Book, and the Prophets.” (2:177)
The Importance of Reason in Iman:
The Qur’anic view of reason and its place in human life deserves careful consideration. Man has been granted a mind which enables him to think, and through the instrument of intellect, is supposed to build up a system of knowledge. Reason converts the raw data supplied by the senses into knowledge and the Qur’an assigns to reason an important role in life:
إِنَّ شَرَّ الدَّوَابِّ عِندَ اللَّـهِ الصُّمُّ الْبُكْمُ الَّذِينَ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ
Verily, the vilest of all creatures in the sight of God are those deaf, those dumb ones who do not use their reason. (8:22) [Asad]
This is a graphic description of the degradation of man when he does not employ reason to his service. Such a man, the Qur’an tells us, not only lives a worthless and debased life here but also renders himself unfit for the hereafter which he enters after death:
وَلَقَدْ ذَرَأْنَا لِجَهَنَّمَ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الْجِنِّ وَالْإِنسِ ۖ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ لَّا يَفْقَهُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ أَعْيُنٌ لَّا يُبْصِرُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ آذَانٌ لَّا يَسْمَعُونَ بِهَا ۚ أُولَـٰئِكَ كَالْأَنْعَامِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ ۚ أُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْغَافِلُونَ
“Many are the Jinns and men we have made for Hell: They have hearts wherewith they understand not, eyes wherewith they see not, and ears wherewith they hear not. They are like cattle,- nay more misguided: for they are heedless (of warning). (7:179) [Yusuf Ali]
This point is again emphasized in Sura Al-Furqan. The Prophet (PBUH) is addressed:
أَمْ تَحْسَبُ أَنَّ أَكْثَرَهُمْ يَسْمَعُونَ أَوْ يَعْقِلُونَ ۚ إِنْ هُمْ إِلَّا كَالْأَنْعَامِ ۖ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ سَبِيلًا
Or dost thou think that most of them listen [to thy message] and use their reason? Nay, they are but like cattle - nay, they are even less conscious of the right way! (25:44) [Asad]
The Qur’an expects man to think and use his power of understanding in the light of the guidance provided by wa‘hi or revelation from Allah. These two sources of guidance, i.e., reason and revelation, are supplementary to each other. If they are kept within their proper spheres, then there will be no conflict between them. The Prophet (PBUH) is commanded to say:
قُلْ هَـٰذِهِ سَبِيلِي أَدْعُو إِلَى اللَّـهِ ۚ عَلَىٰ بَصِيرَةٍ أَنَا وَمَنِ اتَّبَعَنِي
Say [O Prophet]: “This is my way: Resting upon conscious insight accessible to reason, I am calling [you all] unto God - I and they who follow me.” (12:108) [Asad]
It is clear from these verses that Allah puts an extraordinary emphasis on (human) reason and intellect. Those who do not use reason are called worse than animals by Allah. The revelation from Allah is meant to be used with reason and understanding in order to enlighten our minds and hearts and not to be followed blindly:
قُلْ هَلْ يَسْتَوِي الَّذِينَ يَعْلَمُونَ وَالَّذِينَ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ
Say: “Are those equal, those who know and those who do not know?” (39:9) [Yusuf Ali]
And most important of all, Allah says that even His revelations are not to be accepted blindly. The Believers (Mu’minin) according to the Qur’an are:
وَالَّذِينَ إِذَا ذُكِّرُوا بِآيَاتِ رَبِّهِمْ لَمْ يَخِرُّوا عَلَيْهَا صُمًّا وَعُمْيَانًا
“And who, whenever they are reminded of their Sustainer’s messages, do not throw themselves upon them [as if] deaf and blind.” (25:73) [Asad]
Thus, the Qur’an calls upon all human beings to apply their minds (with open minds, not with an a priori bias, prejudice or ancestral customized thoughts) to its teaching, and to strive constantly to grasp its meaning and rationale. The following commands are for everyone (and not just for the scholars):
أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ
“Will they not, then, try to understand this Qur’an?” (4:82, 47:24) [Asad]
كِتَابٌ أَنزَلْنَاهُ إِلَيْكَ مُبَارَكٌ لِّيَدَّبَّرُوا آيَاتِهِ وَلِيَتَذَكَّرَ أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ
“(This is) a Book (the Quran) which We have sent down to you, full of blessings that they may ponder over its Verses, and that men of understanding may remember.” (38:29) [Hilali & Khan]
Thus, Iman has to be individually acquired which requires that each of us consciously strive to acquire knowledge and understanding by using our own God-given gift of reason and intellect in the light of the revelation given in the Qur’an, so that Iman can enter our hearts.
Characteristics of Iman
Here is list of several characteristics of Iman from the Qur’an which shed some further light on its reality:
Iman is not to accept it with the tongue but to accept it with the heart. (2:8-9)
To accept everything which the Qur’an says as truth is Iman. (2:26)
In order to acquire Iman in Allah, it is necessary to first reject every authority other than Allah. (2:25-26)
Iman will lead human beings from darkness towards light. (2:257)
In matters of Iman, one’s profession is irrelevant. (26:111-112)
Unless Iman enters the heart, it cannot be called Iman. One can only say that one has surrendered to Islam. (49:14)
Allah does not discard anyone’s Iman. (2:143)
Finally, an important aspect which must be emphasized here is that no form of force or coercion (direct or indirect, temporal or spiritual) can be used in connection with Iman. This is because it contradicts the very definition of Iman. (As we have seen, Iman is derived from a-m-n which means peace in the heart.) So any forced conversion cannot be allowed in Islam. In fact, forced Iman is no Iman at all.
Therefore, Iman in Islam is not a (blind) faith held privately and subjectively (without any rationale or reason) between an individual and God. As we have seen, there is a clear, explicit, and objective definition of Iman given in the Qur’an and Allah has Himself explained the process of how to acquire it in various other verses related to this topic. Therefore, it is not proper (for any Muslim, at least) to say that faith is a private, subjective matter between an individual and God. Nevertheless, the maxim “faith is a private matter” is accepted as a universal truth. It seems no one thinks that any serious effort is needed to investigate its in-depth meaning and provide a proof for this oft repeated phrase. A moment’s reflection, however, reveals that those who believe in this maxim are really contradicting themselves in their daily lives. A good religious speaker greatly influences people’s thoughts and beliefs. The moment one opens one’s private belief to be influenced by others, it no longer remains private. So much so, that an accomplished religious leader can cause havoc in people’s lives to the extent that a single statement of his may cause them to give up their lives and/or take other people’s lives.
And we know that this scenario is physically as well as psychologically impossible now in the age of the information super highway, World Wide Web, and the Internet. As a matter of fact, this distinction between private and public domain of human life is the product of a concept called dualism which finds no sanction anywhere in the Qur’an. Life is a unity which cannot be bifurcated into private and public parts, religious and secular parts, or material and spiritual parts. In the words of Iqbal:
“Thus the affirmation of spirit sought by Christianity would come not by the renunciation of external forces which are already permeated by the illumination of spirit, but by proper adjustment of man’s relation to these forces in view of the light received from within.
“. . .With Islam, the ideal and real [i.e. spiritual and material] are not two opposing forces which cannot be reconciled. The life of the ideal [i.e. spiritual life] consists, not in a total breach with the real [i.e. material life] which would tend to shatter the very organic wholeness of life into painful oppositions. . .
“Islam, however, faces the opposition with a view to overcome it. . .Islam, recognizing the contact of the ideal with real, says ‘yes’ to the world of matter and points the way to master it with a view to discover a basis for a realistic regulation of life.” [Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, pages 7-8]
Unfortunately, this is what life has become today—comprised of painful oppositions in our feelings and emotions, in our thoughts and actions—because the foundation (i.e. Iman) on which the life’s superstructure is to be built as a coherent system is flawed.
Now if the foundation itself is defective, no matter how much tinkering and patch-up job is done to save the superstructure (of a society), sooner or later it is going to collapse. Many of them have collapsed already and many are on the way moving towards their final destiny.
In fact, we are all on a mission and a journey, continuously moving towards a final destination whether we realize it or not. The electrons and neurons in our bodies, the earth we inhabit, the solar system, the galaxy—from the smallest to the biggest, everything and everyone and life in general, are all on a journey towards their goal determined by Allah.
Allah says in the Qur’an that if all the trees on the planet became pens and all its oceans became ink, the words of Allah (and the meanings contained in them) would not be exhausted (31:27, 18:109). That means we are limited by our finite capacity of knowledge and understanding. But still, Allah enjoins on every one of us (who call ourselves Muslims) to use our reason, intellect, and the up-to-date human knowledge and to directly try to understand and explore the meanings of His revelations (as noted earlier in many verses, especially verse 25:73). We will never be able to exhaust the meanings of Allah’s words but we are asked, nevertheless, to keep striving continuously. That is why it is all the more important not to give up and stop this process by saying that our great scholars of the past have already explored all there was to be explored and they have understood all there was to be understood. And we simply have to refer to them in matters of Islam. This passive approach on our part will not absolve us from our duty to ponder directly in the Qur’an as required by Allah. This requirement is for each and every generation and for all time to come.
Jihad
jihad, (Arabic: “struggle” or “effort”) also spelled jehad, in Islam, a meritorious struggle or effort. The exact meaning of the term jihād depends on context; it has often been erroneously translated in the West as “holy war.” Jihad, particularly in the religious and ethical realm, primarily refers to the human struggle to promote what is right and to prevent what is wrong In the Qurʾān, jihād is a term with multiple meanings. During the Meccan period (c. 610–622 CE), when the Prophet Muhammad received revelations of the Qurʾān at Mecca, the emphasis was on the internal dimension of jihad, termed ṣabr, which refers to the practice of “patient forbearance” by Muslims in the face of life’s vicissitudes and toward those who wish them harm. The Qurʾān also speaks of carrying out jihad by means of the Qurʾān against the pagan Meccans during the Meccan period (25:52), implying a verbal and discursive struggle against those who reject the message of Islam. In the Medinan period (622–632), during which Muhammad received Qurʾānic revelations at Medina, a new dimension of jihad emerged: fighting in self-defense against the aggression of the Meccan persecutors, termed qitāl. In the later literature—comprising Hadith, the record of the sayings and actions of the Prophet; mystical commentaries on the Qurʾān; and more general mystical and edifying writings—these two main dimensions of jihad, ṣabr and qitāl, were renamed jihād al-nafs (the internal, spiritual struggle against the lower self) and jihād al-sayf (the physical combat with the sword), respectively. They were also respectively called al-jihād al-akbar (the greater jihad) and al-jihād al-aṣghar (the lesser jihad). In these kinds of extra-Qurʾānic literature, the different ways of promoting what is good and preventing what is wrong are included under the broad rubric of al-jihād fī sabīl Allāh, “striving in the path of God.” A well-known Hadith therefore refers to four primary ways in which jihad can be carried out: by the heart, the tongue, the hand (physical action short of armed combat), and the sword.
In their articulation of international law, classical Muslim jurists were primarily concerned with issues of state security and military defense of Islamic realms, and, accordingly, they focused primarily on jihad as a military duty, which became the predominant meaning in legal and official literature. It should be noted that the Qurʾān (2:190) explicitly forbids the initiation of war and permits fighting only against actual aggressors (60:7–8; 4:90). Submitting to political realism, however, many premodern Muslim jurists went on to permit wars of expansion in order to extend Muslim rule over non-Muslim realms. Some even came to regard the refusal of non-Muslims to accept Islam as an act of aggression in itself, which could invite military retaliation on the part of the Muslim ruler. The jurists gave special consideration to those who professed belief in a divine revelation—Christians and Jews in particular, who are described as “People of the Book” in the Qurʾān and are therefore regarded as communities to be protected by the Muslim ruler. They could either embrace Islam or at least submit themselves to Islamic rule and pay a special tax (jizyah). If both options were rejected, they were to be fought, unless there were treaties between such communities and Muslim authorities. Over time, other religious groups, including Zoroastrians, Hindus, and Buddhists, also came to be considered “protected communities” and were given rights similar to those of Christians and Jews. The military jihad could be proclaimed only by the legitimate leader of the Muslim polity, usually the caliph. Furthermore, the jurists forbade attacks on civilians and destruction of property, citing statements by the Prophet Muhammad.
Throughout Islamic history, wars against non-Muslims, even when motivated by political and secular concerns, were termed jihads to grant them religious legitimacy. This was a trend that started during the Umayyad period (661–750 CE). In modern times this was also true of the 18th and 19th centuries in Muslim Africa south of the Sahara, where religio-political conquests were seen as jihads, most notably the jihad of Usman dan Fodio, which established the Sokoto caliphate (1804) in what is now northern Nigeria. The Afghan wars of the late 20th and early 21st centuries (see Afghan War; Afghanistan War) were also viewed by many participants as jihads, first against the Soviet Union and Afghanistan’s Marxist government and later against the United States. During and since that time, Islamist extremists have used the rubric of jihad to justify violent attacks against Muslims whom they accuse of apostasy. In contrast to such extremists, a number of modern and contemporary Muslim thinkers insist on a holistic reading of the Qurʾān, assigning great importance to the Qurʾān’s restriction of military activity to self-defense in response to external aggression. This reading further leads them to discount many classical rulings on warfare by premodern Muslim jurists as historically contingent and inapplicable in the modern period.
Caliphate
Caliphate, the political-religious state comprising the Muslim community and the lands and peoples under its dominion in the centuries following the death (632 CE) of the Prophet Muhammad. Ruled by a caliph (Arabic khalīfah, “successor”), who held temporal and sometimes a degree of spiritual authority, the empire of the Caliphate grew rapidly through conquest during its first two centuries to include most of Southwest Asia, North Africa, and Spain. Dynastic struggles later brought about the Caliphate’s decline, and it ceased to exist as a functioning political institution with the Mongol destruction of Baghdad in 1258. This article covers the history of the original caliphal state based in Arabia, the Levant, and Mesopotamia in the 7th–13th century. See caliph for a general discussion of the titular position that heads a caliphate; see also Fāṭimid dynasty and Caliphate of Córdoba for other historical examples of caliphates.
Leadership after Muhammad:
The urgent need for a successor to Muhammad as political leader of the Muslim community was met by a group of Muslim elders in Medina who designated Abū Bakr, the Prophet’s father-in-law, as caliph. According to the majority of Muslims, the Prophet himself had left no instructions for the selection of a leader after him, although a small minority—the precursors of the group later known as the Shiʿah—advocated for ʿAlī’s claim to the Caliphate. It would be anachronistic to assume that this early group supported ʿAlī because he was a cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet. Rather, the early literature indicates that the legitimate caliph was expected to have been an early convert to Islam (precedence in converting to Islam was termed sābiqah in Arabic) and to possess a constellation of moral excellences (faḍāʾil in Arabic), such as truthfulness, generosity, courage, and, above all, knowledge. The caliph’s authority was largely epistemic—that is to say, based on his superior knowledge of both religious and worldly affairs. Later, during the Umayyad period (661–750), there was a growing emphasis on kinship to the Prophet as a criterion of legitimate leadership, likely because the Umayyads wished to thereby compensate for their lack of sābiqah, having accepted Islam late during the Prophet’s lifetime. In response, supporters of the claim to leadership of ʿAlī and his descendents emphasized their lineal descent from the Prophet’s family as a marker of their legitimacy. By the 10th century the orthodox Sunni majority had also come to acknowledge kinship as a factor by understanding legitimate leadership to inhere in descent from the Quraysh, Muhammad’s natal tribe, to which the first four caliphs also belonged.
Although the reigns of the first four caliphs—Abū Bakr, ʿUmar I, ʿUthmān, and ʿAlī—were marred by political upheaval, civil war, and assassination, the era was remembered by later generations of Muslims as a golden age of Islam, and the four caliphs were collectively known as the “rightly guided caliphs” because of their close personal associations with Muhammad. The rightly guided caliphs largely established the administrative and judicial organization of the Muslim community and directed the conquest of new lands. In the 630s Syria, Jordan, Palestine, and Iraq were conquered, Egypt was taken from Byzantine control in 645, and frequent raids were launched into North Africa, Armenia, and Persia.
The Umayyads:
The assassination of ʿUthmān and the troubled caliphate of ʿAlī that followed sparked the first sectarian split in the Muslim community. By 661 ʿAlī’s rival Muʿāwiyah I, a fellow member of ʿUthmān’s Umayyad clan, had wrested away the caliphate, and his rule established the Umayyad dynasty, which lasted until 750. Despite the largely successful reign of Muʿāwiyah, tribal and sectarian disputes erupted after his death. The majority of Muslims regarded the Umayyads as nominally Muslim at best, given their worldly and opulent lifestyles. They were also unpopular on account of their having established dynastic rule by force. Their reign is contemptuously referred to in later sources as mere “kingship” (mulk)—in contrast to the caliphate, which was supposed to be based on the superior personal merits of the ruler and established through a process of consultation with the people. In a conscious effort to confer legitimacy on themselves and to acquire a religious aura, the Umayyads chose the title khalīfat allāh, “the deputy of God,” in contradistinction to the first two caliphs in particular, who are said to have deliberately shunned such a self-aggrandizing title. There were three Umayyad rulers between 680 and 685, and only by nearly 20 years of military campaigning did the next one, ʿAbd al-Malik, succeed in reestablishing the authority of the Umayyad capital of Damascus. ʿAbd al-Malik is also remembered for building the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. Under his son al-Walīd (705–715), Muslim forces took permanent possession of North Africa, converted the native Berbers to Islam, and overran most of the Iberian Peninsula as the Visigothic kingdom there collapsed. Progress was also made in the east with settlement in the Indus River valley. Umayyad power had never been firmly seated, however, and the Caliphate disintegrated rapidly after the long reign of Hishām (724–743). A serious rebellion broke out against the Umayyads in 747, and in 750 the last Umayyad caliph, Marwān II, was defeated in the Battle of the Great Zab by the followers of the Abbasid family.
The Abbasid caliphate:
The Abbasids, descendants of an uncle of Muhammad, owed the success of their revolt in large part to their appeal to various pietistic, extremist, or merely disgruntled groups and in particular to the aid of the Shiʿah, who held that the Caliphate belonged by right to the descendants of ʿAlī. That the Abbasids disappointed the expectations of the Shiʿah by taking the Caliphate for themselves left the Shiʿah to evolve into a sect, permanently hostile to the Sunni majority, that would periodically threaten the established government by revolt. The first Abbasid caliph, al-Saffāḥ (749–754), ordered the elimination of the entire Umayyad clan; the only Umayyad of note who escaped was ʿAbd al-Raḥman, who made his way to Spain and established an Umayyad dynasty that lasted until 1031. Encyclopedia Britannica.
Caliphate, the political-religious state comprising the Muslim community and the lands and peoples under its dominion in the centuries following the death (632 CE) of the Prophet Muhammad. Ruled by a caliph (Arabic khalīfah, “successor”), who held temporal and sometimes a degree of spiritual authority, the empire of the Caliphate grew rapidly through conquest during its first two centuries to include most of Southwest Asia, North Africa, and Spain. Dynastic struggles later brought about the Caliphate’s decline, and it ceased to exist as a functioning political institution with the Mongol destruction of Baghdad in 1258.
This article covers the history of the original caliphal state based in Arabia, the Levant, and Mesopotamia in the 7th–13th century. See caliph for a general discussion of the titular position that heads a caliphate; see also Fāṭimid dynasty and Caliphate of Córdoba for other historical examples of caliphates.
Competing claims:
Abbasid power ended in 945, when the Būyids, a family of rough tribesmen from northwestern Iran, took Baghdad under their rule. They retained the Abbasid caliphs as figureheads. The Samanid dynasty that arose in Khorāsān and Transoxania and the Ghaznavids in Central Asia and the Ganges River basin similarly acknowledged the Abbasid caliphs as spiritual leaders of Sunni Islam. On the other hand, the Fāṭimids proclaimed a new caliphate in 920 in their capital of Al-Mahdiyyah in Tunisia and castigated the Abbasids as usurpers; the Umayyad ruler in Spain, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān III, adopted the title of caliph in 928 in opposition to both the Abbasids and the Fāṭimids. Nominal Abbasid authority was restored to Egypt by Saladin in 1171. By that time the Abbasids had begun to regain some semblance of their former power, as the Seljuq dynasty of sultans in Baghdad, which had replaced the Būyids in 1055, itself began to decay. The caliph al-Nāṣir (1180–1225) achieved a certain success in dealing diplomatically with various threats from the east, but al-Mustaʿṣim (1242–58) had no such success and was murdered in the Mongol sack of Baghdad that ended the Abbasid line in that city. A scion of the family was invited a few years later to establish a puppet caliphate in Cairo that lasted until 1517, but it exercised no power whatsoever. From the 13th century onward a variety of rulers outside Cairo also included caliph among their titles, although their claims to universal leadership of the Muslim community seem to have been more notional than real.
The caliphate in the modern era:
The concept of the caliphate took on new significance in the 18th century as an instrument of statecraft in the declining Ottoman Empire. Facing the erosion of their military and political power and territorial losses inflicted in a series of wars with European rivals, the Ottoman sultans, who had occasionally styled themselves as caliphs since the 14th century, began to stress their claim to leadership of the Islamic community. This served both as means of retaining some degree of influence over Muslim populations in formerly Ottoman lands and as means of bolstering Ottoman legitimacy within the empire. The caliphate was abolished in 1924, following the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the rise of the Turkish Republic.
In the 20th century the reestablishment of the caliphate, although occasionally invoked by Islamists as a symbol of global Islamic unity, was of no practical interest for mainstream Islamist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. It did, however, figure prominently in the rhetoric of violent extremist groups such as al-Qaeda. In June 2014 an insurgent group known as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL; also known as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria [ISIS] and the Islamic State [IS]), which had taken control of areas of eastern Syria and western Iraq, declared the establishment of a caliphate with the group’s leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as caliph. Outside extremist circles, the group’s claim was widely rejected.
Why did you choose this book?
This book is written by Md. Sayed Al Islam. Here are various Islamic information that will be useful for you. thank you
