Argument from Islamic Jurisprudence

INTERPRETATION OF THE ISLAMIC MISSION and non-believers throughout the world.” Rather, it means that “Muslims are obliged to appoint among themselves a political leader for implementing Islamic laws and safeguarding the objectives of the Shariah,” according to our view. As I have stated, my main objection concerns how the mission has been interpreted in the literature under discussion. Therefore, mentioning the appointment of an Imam does not override my objection. Using the appointment of an Imam to justify the interpretation is like deriving the command that “appoint an Imam over the entire world” based on the rules for appointing an Imam for congregational prayers. It should be clear that I have no opposition to the appointment of an Imam or an Islamic government. My objection is actually to the interpretation that claims the true demand of the religion and the mission of the believers is to strive for the establishment of an Islamic government in this world. A certain practical approach may be correct at times, but if this is given a general and theoretical status, then this theory will be inherently flawed. One writer states: If viewed purely from a juridical and legal perspective, it will also be established that the responsibility of the Muslims here is to strive for an Islamic revolution in this