This is a nobody’s secret that Islam possesses a certain priority compared to other religions. Islam bears an inherited quality, which allows it to extend its areal faster than religions do and more successfully to attract in the numbers of other religion followers. It means that if nothing happens, after a while Islam is likely to become the major religion on the earth.

The fascism, socialism, social humanism, imperialism – these are the models of secular states, in some of them religion is of a minor significance, still it features certain values.

However, Islam is not only a religion, actually it is a model of state construction, as well!!! It means, in the long run when Moslems become a majority of population, one may necessary expect the transfer of the state to a government model of the Islamic Shariat.

For this very reason, here a lot of time and space will be devoted to the analysis of this model.

1. Basic principles

Starting an analysis of any model one should make sure it is built competently and precisely, free from logic errors. Otherwise this model is either going to collapse with no result, or is leading to Hell. An example: when constructing a house, the errors made in roof calculation would not lead to a dramatic damage, while walls erected with errors may lead to more serious result - partial destruction, still the worst could be the errors in foundation design – here one might expect a big trouble.

Starting an analysis of the Islam system, immediately we come across some not absolutely correct things. Errors are seen in the basic principles already. Islam postulates: only a merge of the state and belief in God may lead a bright tomorrow, and in confirmation of this thesis it contraposes the Christian religion, which makes no model of the state construction, and a secular development of the person, which gives no predominating role to religion:

(«1», 15) ‘, The Christian doctrine, which has failed to unite all the peoples of Europe, in spite of the fact of being confessed by all of them, may serve as confirmation for that. The reason of its inability to consolidate the peoples of Europe lays in the fact that it is only a spiritual link, which provides no system for a human life’. We are well aware that the difference between the Sunnis and the Shias is a hundred times less than between the Catholics and the Orthodox. Nevertheless, the Sunnis and the Shias for already more than 1000!!! years by now cannot come to agreement. And if the wars between Christians have ended on a boundary of the 14-15 centuries, the latest large-scale slaughter between the Sunnis and the Shias happened to be not so long ago, when Saddam Hussein has burnt out with chemical weapons some tens of thousand persons, while small conflicts never cease at all.

Note. References to data sources are made all through the text. To reduce the text of notes, the following abbreviations are used: («*», **) where the figure in brackets means a consecutive number of source, the figure after commas – means a page. For example, («1», 12) means that the text original may be found in the file ‘The Islam System’ (Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani ‘The Islam System’. The sixth edition (App.) 1422-2001) on page 12. For document No.1 (‘The Islam System’) the page number may be followed with a word ‘Article …’. ‘The Islam System’ contains a draft Constitution of the Islamic state, if you come across the word ‘Article’, it means that the citation refers to a concrete Article of the proposed Islamic Constitution, i.e. constitutional law of the Islamic state.

Islam opposes itself to a secular state: («1», 15) ‘As to the mabda, which has appeared as result of reflection of the man proceeding from his genius, it is not true because it proceeds from a limited reason incapable to encompass the knowledge of all real’. Development is an inborn human feature. In the beginning of our era, there the Ptolemy’s system of co-ordinates has been adopted and applied as a true one, where the Earth was a centre of the Universe, the Sun and 5 more planets rotated around the Earth, and the dome of the sky was a firm cover with God behind it. Later the human development has brought us our knowledge of planets, comets, galaxies and the Universe, we also know about atoms and molecules, and much more, actually. It is fair to say that ‘man does not know everything, but he is capable of developing and learning, and it is not known yet whether there is a limit for his development and knowledge’. This is true. The testament that man is not capable to know the real is disputable.

2. Political model of state construction

(«1», 40) ‘Islam is religion in which the state is its integral part’.

(«1», 18) ‘… not the man defines superior purposes for preservation of society, Allah defines them through his orders and interdictions, they neither change, nor they develop’. Here we ask you to pay a special attention to the permanence of principles, because herein below (part 4) we will refer to it, specifically.

(«1», 18) ‘… each Moslem and the state act according to orders and interdictions of Allah for they put in order all affairs of the man.’

(«1», 19) ‘… priority belongs to Shariat only, not to the state or the people’.

(«1», 50) ‘the Islamic doctrine (Aqida) makes a state basis. Islamic aqida forms up a basis of the constitution and Shariat laws, as well … they may contain nothing coming to them not from Islamic aqida’.

One may come to a very simple conclusion from the above-stated: the religion is a basis of the state, nothing and nobody in the state can do anything that would contrast to religion.

It’s worth noting that the offered state looks not very friendly:

(«1», 56) ‘Jihad is sacred duty of Moslems. According to it, military preparation is obligatory. Each Muslim man, who has reached the age of 15, shall take military training to be ready for jihad’.

In interpretation of the Russian Muslim theologists («5», 32) the word ‘jihad’ comes from the Arabic ‘diligence in matters of belief’, ‘endeavor’, ‘intensifying efforts’ … ‘jihad’ is a personal matter and a religious duty of the believer in frames of the freedom and rights, which are provided by the state laws. Only in case of attack from the outside, aggression or the arisen necessity of waging a defensive war ‘jihad’ can be regarded as a ‘sacred war’ for protection of the rights and freedom, the motherland, the family, the house. The interpretation of ‘jihad’ by separate extremist pseudo-Islamic groups, and by some mass-media, as a ‘war with religious purposes’ shall contradict the Koran and Sunnah of the Prophet (SAW), because the war in the form of aggression is considered inadmissible in Islam!’

However, one should have in mind that the age of fifteen is the age of a boy with a mentality not yet shaped, and when at his 15 years he starts studying not the basics of sciences and arts, but the basics of warfighting, nothing good can be expected now or later from the people brought up in such a spirit.

Moreover, Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani ‘our peregrine friend’ and his attitude towards all other non-Islamic states is very well described in the following words: («1», 68) ‘the States with which we have no agreements and, actually, such imperialist states, as England, America and France, and also those states, which bear artful plans in relation to our state, such as Russia, are considered as potentially at war with us’ … ‘entry to the territory of our country is forbidden for citizens of such states’.

So, what do we see here? To declare a war, it would be enough to say that a state bears artful plans. It is enough for declaration of ‘jihad’, namely as the ‘war with religious purposes’.

Actually, it is intolerant not only to gentiles in other states and the states with politically non-Islamic structure, and it is not friendly towards their own non-Muslims: the Prophet (SAW) directly forbids («3», 4) ‘to wish a long life to … non-Muslims’.

The most important thing in the state is a model of government.

(«1», 51) ‘Article 22: the government system is based on the following four principles:

  1. Shariat, not the people, bears priority.
  2. Ummah possesses the power (all believers in this territory).
  3. Moslems’ duty is to appoint one Caliph.
  4. Only the Caliph has the right to adopt the Shariat laws, and only the Caliph publishes the constitution and other laws.

Article 23: The State is based on following eight instances:

  1. Caliph;
  2. Authorized assistant (muavin tafvid);
  3. Executive assistant (muavin tanfiz);
  4. Amir of jihad (the commander of Islamic army);
  5. Governors (valiis - chiefs of local regions);
  6. Justice (kadi);
  7. Official bodies;
  8. Ummah assembly (majlis-al-ummah)’.

Actually, the ruling style in the state is a monarchy, where a single person holds the power for a life-long period, and single-handedly takes any decisions. Only the general assembly of ummah is in the right to dismiss the Caliph, which is practically unreal. We have repeatedly discussed the disadvantage of such system, so we are not going to spend much time on it, we would only remind that this system cannot guarantee or prevent holding of the supreme position by a weak-minded, or aggressive man, or a person of low culture. And even if the best and fair ruler ascends to the supreme post, there’s still no guarantee that after a while some irreversible mental changes do not occur in his mind (as it happened to Ivan the Terrible) and suddenly the best ruler does not turn into a dreadful tyrant.

This is not the whole story yet. Despite the fact that the Russian Muslim theologists say that («5», 13) ‘All people are born free, and nobody has the right to mancipate, humiliate, repress or exploit anyone,

(«1», 51) ‘Article 19: Free men only, not slaves have the right … to exercise administration, and any business, which is deemed pertaining to a governance field’. No comments.

And the last one. Here we refer to the state main objectives:

(«1», 51) ‘Article 11: Primary activity of the state is propagation of Islam’;

(«1», 67) ‘Article 183: Islam propagation is the axis the foreign politics rotate about …

Article 184, item 1. ‘The countries within the borders of Islamic World are considered as members of a uniform state’.

3. What would mankind lose under the rule of World caliphate?

1. One should not forget that Allah had granted to people the Koran in the Arabic language. Translation of the Koran into any other language leads to distortion of meaning. For this reason namely, the proposed constitution contains the following item: («1», 50) ‘Article 8: the Arabic language is a sole language of Islam and the only language to be used by the state’.

So, the first we lose are all languages of international communication.

2. («1», 66) ‘Article 165: the Islamic doctrine should be a basis, whereupon the educational program is built. Thus, all subjects and teaching methods are developed in a strict conformity with this basis without any divergence’. No surah in Koran tells about sporting usefulness. For this reason, sports are so poorly developed in the Arabic countries - sports seem to be neither forbidden, nor allowed. In this context the topic of girls should be considered separately.

(«3», 4) ‘12. The wife shall perform duties assigned to her and obey to her husband’. The primary duty of woman is her husband and family, and the more stringent is Islam, the lesser her rights are in employment, the more she sits at home. Besides, there’s a lot she cannot show to a man (body), for this reason in Islamic countries women wear high-necked long dresses and a hijab … what sports of women in such closed garments are we talking about?

The second we lose are sports. Man's sports by much, woman’s - practically all.

Note. The below text contains many references to Islamic Shariat. The Islamic legislation is developed on the basis of the Koran and Hadithes (speeches of the Prophet (SAW)). Characteristically, the Islamic law contains no ways for people to act ill. The Islamic legislation is a rule of Shariat relating to actions and acts of people.

All actions of people are subdivided into 8 provisions:

  1. Fard is the action binding each man to execute in a strict form the instruction of Shariat. Their performance will be rewarded by Allah.
  2. Wajib - as well as fard, is an action to be performed obligatory. Allah will reward the man for execution of wajib, failure to exercise it without valid excuse to be considered as a big sin.
  3. Sunnah - these actions were executed by Prophet Mohammed (SAW), he said that their execution is rewarded.
  4. Mustahabb are the actions often exercised by the Prophet (SAW). Men performing mustahabb will be rewarded (sawab). Failure to exercise them will not be considered as a sin.
  5. Mubah is such an action, which one may do or may not do. For performance and default there is no award and there is no sin. These actions are innumerable. All activities, which are not required or condemned by Shariat, refer to mubah.
  6. Haram is an action strictly forbidden and condemned by Islamic Shariat.
  7. Makruh is an action, which Махаммед (SAW) has forbidden to make. The one who does not do makruh, meaningly being afraid of a sin, will be awarded by Allah - sawab.
  8. Mustakruh is an action, which Prophet Mahammad (SAW) preferred not to make at all. He explained that men, who have made mustakruh, will receive only harm.

3. There is an express prohibition: («3», 21) ‘155. To keep a dog in a room’. As earlier there was a need in catching mice, you will not see a direct prohibition for a cat anywhere, however direct or indirect interdictions for domestic animals are often met.

This is not very good, after all the most of educated World obviously sees that the domestic animals help us in bringing up our children to love our smaller brothers and to have a gentle heart.

The third we lose is the right to have domestic animals (except for cats).

4. It is forbidden: («3», 16) ‘50. To play dramatic plays for reviving spirits. 51. To dance, to cheer up people’. («3», 18) ‘6. To applaud the actors’.

Actually, it is an express prohibition of theatres.

5. It is forbidden: («3», 16) ‘88. To depict people, animals’. All of us know that Islam forbids images of people and animals. For this reason on the mosque walls you may read citations of Koran, but you will not see any picture.

We know well that everything, which is not falling within the Islamic paradigm is not obligatory for studying or even storage. Therefore, with an approach of Islam we will lose all painting, except for individual pictures of still-life and landscapes. The rest, most likely, will be either directly destroyed, or will decay in a warehouse, as unnecessary.

6. It is forbidden: («3», 18) ‘1. Singing songs for reviving spirits. 2. Listening songs, musical melodies. 3. Playing musical instruments in spirits. 4. Dancing to music in spirits. … 7. To store musical instruments in the house, even if you do not play them’.

These interdictions eliminate ballet and basically all dances. All music will disappear. The first that will sink into oblivion – will be the church music, we are going to lose Mozart and Beethoven, and, certainly, Bach. Gradually, absolutely all will disappear.

7. It is forbidden: («3», 16) ‘52. To read verses and to sing songs producing an unpleasant low mood effect’.

The first, that can be critisized is that the poetry and literature make one common genre, and there is no specific sense in making a barrier between the verses and books. But the plague of the thing is that the main body of classical literature is created on a powerful conflict, the author has raised to a heigh level and put for observation from various sides. One can hardly rejoice reading the tragedies of Shakespeare or Moliere. Spirits will hardly be revived through reading war novels of Remarque and Barbusse or Simonov and Sholokhov? From the point of view of Islam, all these books will not be needed.

Moreover, as we remember, everything should correspond to Islam and its aqida. A question: what way the books with alien religion (especially, pagan), books about Indians, detectives or books of science fiction would correspond to this aqida? No way! Hence, Homer and Dante, Mayne Reid and Cooper, Jules Verne and Jonathan Swift, Conan Doyle and Akunin - all go to a scrapyard of history. The titans as Dostoevsky and Tolstoy would go down without saying.

It is a very interesting item. According to this item, 99.999 % of the classical literature can be written off straight away. All classical literature will decay in ashes.

8. The following statement is very interesting: («1», 30) ‘Books in history cannot be taken for a source absolutely, as in all centuries they were written under the influence of political situation existing at the time, and are full of fabrications’.

Where, in your opinion, all history would go? To a scrapyard named after itself.

9. Interestingly, what’s going to happen to science and, the more so, the fundamental researches? According to the Islamic doctrine, («1», 3) ‘the man is limited, as he develops in everything up to a certain limit, which he cannot overpass’. Therefore («1», 5) ‘… the man not in a condition to understand anything being out of his reason and perception’.

It goes without saying that the basic subject for studying at school and generally wherever possible shall be the Koran, activity of Prophet Mohammed (SAW) and everything relating to religion. All the rest: («1», 66) ‘Article 169: … teaching the experimental sciences shall be in accordance with the requirements of life and shall not be limited at any level of training. As to the human sciences, they shall be taught at initial levels, according to a concrete policy, which does not contradict to Islamic ideas and Islamic laws’.

Georgi Gulia has very well described in his novel what may happen to sciences. In the course of the story the Great high mufti comes to the observatory to Omar Khayyám, looks at instruments, hears about stars and motion of planets, but: («5», 109) ‘Sincerely, he could not understand, what all this knowledge with degrees and minutes, ecliptic and horizon were for? Is it not said in the Book (Koran): ‘All belongs to Him (Allah), that in heavens and that on the earth: really Allah is plentiful and glorious!’? So, what do we have it here for? To look at the sky, to glorify Allah! But it is not needed any more. The Prophet of Prophets (Mohammed (SAW)) has made it in the best way. Or, maybe, in disproof of this all? Then this invention is not only blasphemous in effect, but it shall be liable to severe punishment, like larceny or robbery. In the name of who is this observatory constructed?’ The book about Avicenna reads nearly the same: when the companion of Avicenna («4», 97) «… started telling about a new astronomical instrument, Al-Birunī has invented together with a mathematician as-Sahri. The judge turned to them abruptly and suddenly chanted: ‘Study of not written in the Koran is needless and wrongful’.

Hereto we add an absolute power of Caliph and we see that today an educated Caliph may reign and sciences will be developing, and tomorrow comes a conservative one, the policy is changed, and for the next 40 years no human science is studied, at all. Moreover, we might burn some books, as unnecessary and harmful.

I don’t know, what you would say, but in my opinion, there will be no sciences, at all, needless to mention the human ones.

10. And the last, they teach us that the love and happiness are close notions. Therefore the Russian Islamic theologists say that every person has the right to choose his second half by himself. However, following to the Koran and Mohammed (SAW) and proceeding from the rules («3», 5) ‘If the bride is asked in marriage to a suitable groom and consent is reached – she shall be married’. Here the consent is reached, as a rule, not between the future husband and wife, but between the parents of the future husband and wife.

In this context, Islam offers a very strict definition for the idea of ‘happiness’: («1», 36) ‘Happiness is an achievement of content of Allah, instead of human needs satisfaction, as the satisfaction of all human needs, both the intestine necessity, and the needs of instincts, is vital for human life preservation. Their satisfaction in itself cannot be happiness’. The thing is that happiness is an understanding of the fact that you lead a faithful life and Allah is happy with you and is ready to take you to paradise in the other world. Here comes a question: how can you be sure that you lead a faithful life, that Allah is happy with you and that you are fit to the life in paradise? Only the prophet can be sure of it, as prophets are innocent. All others are sinful, after Mohammed (SAW) no prophets will be on the Earth (so says Allah), it means, NOBODY can be sure that he will get to paradise … it means, NO TRUE HAPPINESS CAN EXIST IN THE ISLAMIC STATE BY DEFINITION!!!

4. Standard of living in the Islamic state

Do you remember a notable statement of Plato, where he said that an ideal state would be a state, where all citizens were free, and every one of them had at least three slaves?

It is a good illustration that each epoch is rather specific in defining of correct, duly and useful things. The mankind develops in terms of intellect and technics. What was normal for a slaveholding system, would not suit any more the feudal formation, what was natural in the 7th century AD is no good today.

What has Jesus Christ left after himself? Only 10 commandments. And these commandments do not refer neither to time, nor to space. All the rest was written by people, hence, it cannot be a priori true for honoring, worship and performance. What has Prophet Mohammed (SAW) left after himself – a complete system of life with a set of rules. Let's take a closer look at them and try to understand, whence and what for they have appeared?

(«1», 66) ‘Article 163: The state currency should be secured by a gold or silver stock, whether or not it is emitted in coins’. It is forbidden: («3», 13) ‘20. To add additives to gold and silver coins and pass them off as fine’.

What does it mean? It says that in the days of Prophet Mohammed (SAW) there was a gold-secured money system. This system has become outdated since long. Today we live in a monetary economy, our ancestors could not imagine. However, if the Islamic state comes to our World, the gold-secured currency will become the basis of its economy again.

(«3», 8) ‘46. Before going to bed shake it’.

What does it mean? In those days, there was no soap, no detergent powder and no washing machines. But parasites there were always, bed included: mites, lice and other fungus. This simple rule, when observed, helped people to avoid stings of insects, to stay clean and be healthy.

It is forbidden: («3», 22) ‘199. To consume ablution water in excess of reasonable norm’.

What does it mean? In those days, in Mecca and Medina there was a great water deficit. This simple rule, when observed, helped all the community to use reasonably such important resource, as water.

(«3», 5) ‘5. Wash hands before meal. 6. Wash hands after meal again. … 10. Lick some salt before and after meal’.

What does it mean? It means that the Prophet (SAW) cared much about health of his people. At that time salt - being rather a big and not a cheap delicacy – was used as a substance required for normal functioning of a person. For this reason he wanted people to take some salt before and after their meal.

Washing hands before and after meal makes an elementary hygiene we do not think of much today. At that time these simple rules guaranteed reduction of intestinal and infectious diseases many times!

The most interesting provisions regulate visiting lavatory, it is forbidden: («3», 19-20) ‘66. To leave a toilet the left foot first (typically the right foot goes first, while in latrines it was the left foot to come first and to leave last). 67. To enter a toilet citing the ayats of Koran and praying. 68. To defecate in a room or indoors. 69. To enter a toilet without a headdress. 70. To defecate and urinate in a standing position. 71. To defecate and urinate in the distance less than 40 steps from a mosque or tombs. 72. To make complete ablution or taharah in a toilet. 73. To wash up with the right hand. 74. To look at the genitals in the process of defecation. 75. To look at the excrement. … 87. To wipe up with paper, grass, hay, leaves and other materials of value (solid soil may be used)’.

Certainly, this list of rules for visiting latrine is incomplete. Interesting for us are items 70, 75 and 87.

In the times of the Prophet (SAW) there were no urinal bowls, people were under-educated, and the clothes were rarely changes or washed. The interdiction to urinate in a standing position led to elementary things: men did not wet the trousers and did not stink of urine at home, in the street and on a visit.

In the times of the Prophet (SAW) there were no such medications, as today. He could not assume that a urine and feces analysis could give information about the person, more than 100 perfect prays. And as it all smells bad and the man should not be picking the excrements, it were much easier to forbid looking at all that.

In the times of the Prophet (SAW) there was no toilet paper. Using grass or a piece of wood for wiping could not provide cleanliness for the known place of body. For that time the best cleanliness was reached by washing.

In general the Shariat laws contain some things not very clear for us today, for example, the Prophet (SAW) has directly forbidden («3», 13) ‘52. To beat servants’.

All above-stated is written to make clear for the reader that Islam system was rather good for the year 600 AD, it was very progressive and really cared for people.

However, since then nearly one and a half millenium have elapsed. We have learnt to fly to space, mastered a brain surgery, we know about atoms and viruses and have learnt to wipe up with a toilet paper.

What was perspective 1400 years ago, today makes a history, and the rules of the past have become in some part ridiculous or not very clear.

The mischief of it is that (we repeat ourselves) («1», 18) ‘… the prime targets for society preservation are defined not by a man, they are defined by orders and interdictions of Allah, they nether change, nor develop’. The Islam expressly FORBIDS to modify the rules of human existence relative to what was good at the time of Mohammed (SAW).

Try to ask the most advanced and educated Islamic theologists of the following:

‘If the mankind invents a method of sleeping in a sort of device, where there were a zero gravity and no need for bed-clothes, would they still be shaking the bed, and then what to understand as bed – the whole device entirely?’

‘If the mankind reaches a new level of development, where payment for goods and services required no money (suppose a sort of an ideal communism), would they not refuse from money and continue paying everything with gold?’

‘If the mankind invents some mechanisms capable of cleaning separate parts of human body (hands and rear) and the whole body with no water at all, would they still be washing hands before and after meal, and washing up in toilets … because Allah so ordered?’

Be sure, NO ONE of theologists will give you an answer. From a logical point of view it is complete stupidity to heat up water in a bowl, then soap and wipe the body with a towel, when there was a special device to clean the body for a pair of seconds completely, and to diagnose it for any disease at the same time. However, Allah has prenominated the ways of doing everything, and NO ONE IS ALLOWED to change them!!!! It all means, we will go on shaking bed, paying gold, defecating on hunkers ONLY, and washing up the rear.

5. A small, but very important supplement to item 4.

Even the Russian Islamic theologists do not deny the fact that for a faithful Moslem having the family with many children is a right way. From the point of view of Islam it is good to have many children. Certainly, nobody has ever considered the matters of overpopulation. Moreover, the proposed Constitution directly reads: («1», 36) ‘… he (Caliph) is not authorized to violate any law of Shariat under the pretext of any interest … for example, he cannot forbid one family to have to more than one child under the pretext of food shortages’.

We all understand that while we live in a secular state, we are guided by secular state laws. In the Islamic state there rule the laws of Allah, and the word of its Prophet (SAW), which are invariable and never come under discussion. In this context the following thesis (actually, a binding law of the Islamic state) is very characteristic: («2», 34) ‘the rasul Allah (SAW) (Prophet Mohammed) says: ‘The one who fences any land shall possess this land’, ‘The one who builds up any place, which was not built up by any Moslem, shall possess this place’.

And a final one, from Sunnah (i.e. somewhat to be rewarded by Allah): («2», 34) ‘65. To kill animals, insects harmful for people’.

It means, if a wild hare, a wild boar, a bear or even another harmful crane starts visiting my house, and I kill the beast, Allah will award me in the next World, according to the laws of Islamic Shariat!


Prior to the wording of our conclusion, we would like to remind that our work gives little attention to a problem of Sunni and Shias. This is not because we are unaware of this problem, after all, Sunnis and Shias are well known irreconcilable enemies. As it was already mentioned, the difference between these directions of Islam is 100-fold less, than the difference between Catholics and Orthodox.

There is one most important matter of principle. The Shias say that the supreme governance of people can only be realized by the line of prophet Mohammed (SAW) descendants, because only the Prophet (SAW) has given over them a secret, how to interpret the points at issue in Koran. The Sunni say that the Koran should be understood literally, therefore any faithful Moslem may rule the caliphate. As far as we see, it does not change dramatically the general concept of the matter in question. In the long run, it does not change the general concept if not every representative of ummah, but only the direct descendants of the Prophet (SAW) would run in elections.

So, what do we see here as an ideal of the Islamic state? In the beginning of its formation, it was a monarchic state, slaveholding, very aggressive, which based on the belief in Allah and the principles of life from Allah and Prophet Mohammed (SAW) invariable in time, i.e. permanent because they were true.

The utmost purpose of the Islamic state is construction of a unified universal World caliphate with a single religion - Islam. Since the state is religion, and the religion is the state, in the long run we see here an EVERLASTING, i.e. till the end of time, unified universal World caliphate.

The Islamic state may exercise a rather liberal attitude towards representatives of other religions. However these representatives are deprived of the government right, their quantity, according to state main objectives, aspires to zero, it means, they will never be able to separate, to create their own state.

No other model of political government can be established!!!

No other economic model can be applied!!!


All languages of international communication disappear in the Islamic state, only the Arabic language will remain.

Sports come to a minimum, girls do not exercise it at all.

In the Islamic state music and theatres completely disappear, painting, except for rare landscapes - without birds and animals, and still-life will be brought to nought, 99.999 % of the literature, practically all books in history disappear.

Happiness is a separate topic, however there’s no happiness in the Islamic state by definition.

There is a very good saying: the state which does not remember the lessons of history will have to repeat the errors. The basics of human wisdom are laid in music, history and literature. As soon as this all disappears, people will never know, what were the Punic wars or the WWII like, who were Nero, Caligula or Hitler. So, each time people will be easily putting new tyrants upon their heads, at first being terrified by consequences of their activity, and later again forgetting them and putting the new ones.

As a matter of fact, with so rigidly described system of life in hand, one might correctly and accurately survive in it ONLY at the level of development and life of the year 600 AD, i.e. equal to the level of time of the Prophet (SAW). This is what is going to happen, actually: the mankind in its development will be moving not forward, but to the ideal described in the Sunnah and the Koran, i.e. back to the year 600, where it will get stuck FOR EVER!!!

Approximately, the development of state will follow the scheme: Moslems as the faithful should do, will be fruitful to the extent of forces and possibilities. In the process of reproduction, they, according to the laws of Shariat, will be occupying and appropriating more and more territories of the planet. So far as the reproduction process is not regulated, but to have many children is faithfully good, gradually the whole planet will be divided into plots for settling. There will remain no places of wild nature, as they are not needed, and a kill of wild animals is rewarded by Allah. (This assumption may be checked easily: it’s enough to compare the number of zoo and reservation parks in the countries with for a long-time developed Muslim ummah, as Pakistan, Egypt, Syria and so forth, with their number in the Christian countries).

Finally, the Earth will face a horrible overpopulation, and as consequence - hunger, diseases and a terrible plague. Do not forget that there’s no literature, no history, therefore the survivors would, at the best, transmit their fragments to descendants orally. And the whole process will start anew.

Thus, upon the unified universal World caliphate is established, every 300-500 years the planet will be suffering from overpopulation, hunger and devastation. These cycles will repeat everlasting, no one will stop them, because from the cradle to the grave religion and state are dead-connected together for a person. Basically, if sometime this process is interrupted by chance, nothing good is going to return to the Earth, because by that moment no living creatures, except for the people, hens and cows, remain on the planet.

Our readers are to decide, whether or not the above stated seems to be truth, how much does it look like a paradise on the Earth.

In our analysis we are far from any assessment, all the above stated reflects our opinion only.

Appendix. Opinion of the Russian Islamic theologists

Thank God in Russia there are still many well-educated and inlightened Islamic theologists. For the time being there is a chance to talk over and discuss.

The Russian branch of Islam, perhaps, is one of the most peace-loving in the world. We have already cited above that the Russian Moslems stand against slavery, for freedom of belief, for freedom of marriage by love and inter-confessional marriages.

However … STILL!!!! … varnished tale can't be round, so, it means:

1. Take it or leave it, they do not recognize other religions and consider the belief in Allah obligatory: («5», 5) ‘the Belief in Allah is obligatory for any person for only through it one may reach happiness in the life terrestrial and in the future life’.

2. («5», 20) ‘It is not characteristic for Moslems to divide the science into religious and ‘secular’, and the historical experience shows as circles of Moslems with serious religious background produced world-famous experts in medicine – Ibn Sina (Avicenna), astronomy - Ulugh Beg, philosophy – Al-Arabi, etc. … When the assertions of representatives of a secular science correspond to the Islam basic provisions, they will be accepted by believers, but Moslems cannot accept as a fundamental notion any assertions denying the existence of God as they contradict the main pillar of Islam - tauhid. Moreover, the duty of Moslems is struggle against proliferation of such assertions among the ummah’.

It is clearly stated: the Russian ummah should eliminate the undesired by Islam.

Ask any theologist to name ten great Islamic scientists, who have created or invented something in the Islamic countries with centuries-long history, such as Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan, Afghanistan for the recent 200 years … They will not give a name, say nothing of great musicians and writers – there were no such persons, at all!!!

Please pay attention, what great scientists the Council of muftis of Russia refers to: Al-Arabi (1165-1240). Ulugh Beg (1394-1449), who was assassinated. Ibn-Sina (980-1037), who periodically had to escape from town to town because of Muslim theologists, who blamed him of atheism and heresy. Today they are proud of those, who lived more 500-800 years ago, who was dishoused and deprived a possibility to work, as there is nobody else to be proud of. Omar Khayyam (1048-1131), the great Tadjik scientist, astrologist and poet has invented a Jalali calendar, which was more accurate, than the Gregorian one, but its observatory war set to fire, later he was forced to stop the study of a star sky. He was the last of great Islamic poets, and what did he sing in the Ruba’i? He sang of wine and women – topics directly forbidden by Islam!!!

By the way, the Russian Moslems eagerly speak about equality of religions, but try to marry a representative of the Islamic world and an adept of polytheism (adherer of pagan religion) – NOTHING will be done, because it is directly forbidden by Islam!

After all, if the Russian Islam aspired to live really ONLY under secular state laws, would we have witnessed in Russia the precedents and even!!!trials!!! for the right of Muslim girls to go to schools in hijab?

The Russian Islamic theologists do not really accept the books, which serve as a base for analysis of the Islam system as the theory of construction of a decent civil society, because though Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani and his followers are not an extremist branch of Islam, but they have shown an excessive sharpness of judgements and excessive pedantry in religion questions. Despite it, the books of Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani are not exactly the material, it would be necessary to analyze. For better understanding of the results of the Islamic state establishment, the most extremist literature should be subjected to analysis, and now we will explain why.

Should you approach to any Russian Islamic theologist and ask to read the above text. You will neither be torn to pieces, nor blamed of religion prosecution, but they will try to convince you that the written above is not an absolute truth.

If so, please ask them the following questions:

1. ‘Is it true that the Prophet (SAW) is the last on the Earth, and there will be no more prophets till the Doomsday, that the Creator through sending the Koran down to Mohammed (SAW) has definitively generated the arch of divine Laws and the religious doctrine?’

The answer will be unequivocal – ‘YES’.

2. ‘Is it true that religion in Islam has a priority over the state?’

You’ll hear a lot of words meaning approximately: since we believe in God, that He created all real and the happiness is in coming nearer to the God, then the belief in God, not temporal affairs, should make a basis of all.

By and large the answer will be ‘YES’.

3. ‘Is it true that if the religion is primary, then the basis of the state is in following to Islam and Islam propagation?’

This question is more complicated, and it cannot be given a direct response. However, in absence of a direct answer it will be clear for you that Islam will not be able to offer anything except as ‘YES’.

4. ‘Do you agree that Islam is a more dynamical religion, that it extends in the World faster, than other religions? It is also explained by the fact that Moslems have more children and because the belief in Allah is a pillar of Divine worship and a point of life. Therefore in the mixed religious families, typically, children are Moslems’.

Basically, they will agree with you and answer ‘YES’.

5. ‘Then with other things being equal, would you agree that in the far prospect Islam becomes a dominating religion on the planet?’

Most likely, after a minor contemplation the answer will be ‘YES’.

6. ‘Is it true that the country where the majority of population are Moslems, aspires to establishment of Shariat laws in the state, and the state government system will be established according to the rules of Islam, i.e. Caliph will rule?’

The answer will be ‘YES’.

7. ‘Then it comes out so that the religion aspires to establish a uniform universal Islamic caliphate to be based on the Koran, statements of the Prophet (SAW) and Shariat laws, isn’t it?’

Most likely, after a minor contemplation the answer will be ‘YES’.

Now we can pass to a more complicated questions about the government system and the results of establishment of such state on the Earth.

8. ‘Among those who apply for the highest posts, there always can be persons of a greater or minor wit, persons more educated and less educated. Suppose, you personally are a very intelligent and educated person, and you apply for the supreme position - from the Russian ummah of 5 million persons and, for example, an absolutely mediocre Iranian leader from the ummah of 150 million persons. Who, most likely, will be selected: you - intelligent and educated, or the other one - mediocre?’

This question may perplex anyone, you’ll never get a direct answer to it. You’ll be given a number of examples as intelligent people regardless of anything to the contrary have achieved the supreme position, but sure they never say ‘intelligent will be selected’.

9. Then you may go on and ask: ‘the Power is very sweet, sometimes it makes a major purpose of a person. Not a secret that a decent person would prefer to step aside, than to act dishonestly against his opponent. However, persons are rather individual. In a secular state it is possible to defame the opponent, in order to take a desired position. For this purpose it is necessary to demonstrate to society, how the opponent had infringed the basics of this society: to blame him of drunkenness or narcotism, misconduct, waste of budget money, etc. To win elections in a religious state, most easier would be to demonstrate to society that the opposite candidate has departed from the belief basement. In this case any educated Moslem could be blamed much easier, because he could listen music, attend to studying sciences and reading books, etc. Those who have NO books at home, except for the Koran and other religious books, would hardly be blamed of retreat from the Islamic belief! Am I right?’

No one can oppose the truth – they will agree with you.

10. Now you may ask a final question: ‘Would anybody, and you personally, guarantee that the post of the world Caliph would never be taken by the one who, adhering to every letter of Koran and hiding behind the divine worship, will actually attend to a total elimination of everything, including the culture and art, history and sciences?’

No one and never would give this guarantee to you. On the contrary, most likely someday the above situation will necessarily occur in this system.

Typically, the most extreme variants need to be foreseen. It means that materials of Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani are too mild for consideration of the matter of what the complete victory of Islam in the World might result. To understand all the depth of a possible disaster, it is necessary to take the most extreme and terrible extremist materials for the analysis.


  1. Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani ‘The Islam System’. The sixth edition (App.) 1422 - 2001.
  2. Taqi al-Din al-Nabhani ‘The Economic system in Islam». The sixth edition (App.) 1425 - 2004 ‘Dar al-umma’
  3. Islamic Shariat (Internet source)
  4. Prophet Mohammed (SAW) (Internet source)
  5. ‘The social program of the Russian Moslems. Basic provisions.’ The Council of muftis of Russia, 2001.
  6. Valeriy Voskoboynikov “The Great Esculapian’, Molodaya Gvardiya, 1972.
  7. George Gulija ‘Story of Omar Khayyam’, Molodaya Gvardiya, 1975.