How the Caliph of ISIS was selected.

The Caliph as many know him as al-Baghdadi was selected by method 1 in this fatwa. And the Caliphate was reestablished. He fulfilled all the requirements of Caliph, and the Islamic State fulfilled all the requirements for it's status as the Caliphate.

https://islamqa.info/en/111836

There is no such thing as Islamic State.

Those are terrorists funded by American state.

Islamic State can only be founded by European Muslims from Balkans and Marmara Region Turkey who descended from a strict Roman Order and Culture.

Beduin Arabs aren't capable to handle 10 Sheeps not to mention a State.

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever dies and did not make an oath of allegiance (to the Muslim leader) has died a death of jaahiliyyah.”

(Narrated by Sahih Muslim, 1851).

And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “If allegiance is given to two khaleefahs, then kill the second of them.”

(Narrated by Sahih Muslim, 1853).

Bump

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by al-Bosni

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever dies and did not make an oath of allegiance (to the Muslim leader) has died a death of jaahiliyyah.”

(Narrated by Sahih Muslim, 1851).

And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “If allegiance is given to two khaleefahs, then kill the second of them.”

(Narrated by Sahih Muslim, 1853).

---

even if his actions are unislamic? like .... killing muslims?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazyladybutterfly

even if his actions are unislamic? like .... killing muslims?

---

Yes, if another Muslim claims to be Caliph they should be killed even if they are Muslim. There can only be one leader of Muslims worldwide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by al-Bosni

Yes, if another Muslim claims to be Caliph they should be killed even if they are Muslim. There can only be one leader of Muslims worldwide.

---

makes no sense lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazyladybutterfly

makes no sense lol

---

It does if you want to keep Muslims united.

If a man is a bad caliph, is there a way to put him out?

In ancient time, there weren't two caliphs at the same times?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazyladybutterfly

makes no sense lol

---

Maybe you should have read the text on https://islamqa.info/en/111836, which al-Bosni provided.

This is what number 3 says:

Spoiler!

By means of force and prevailing over others. When a man becomes caliph by prevailing over the people by the sword, and he establishes his authority and takes full control, then it becomes obligatory to obey him and he becomes the leader of the Muslims. Examples of that include some of the Umayyad and ‘Abbasid caliphs, and those who came after them. This method is contrary to sharee’ah, because it is seized by force. But because great interests are served by having a ruler who rules the ummah, and because a great deal of mischief may result from chaos and loss of security in the land, the one who seizes authority by means of the sword should be obeyed if he seizes power by force but he rules in accordance with the laws of Allaah.

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

If a man rebels and seizes power, the people must obey him, even if he seizes power by force and without their consent, because he has seized power.

The reason for that is that if his rule is contested, it will lead to a great deal of evil, and this is what happened during the Umayyad period when some of them seized power by means of force and gained the title of caliph, and people obeyed them in obedience to the command of Allaah. End quote.

Sharh al-‘Aqeedah al-Safaareeniyyah (p. 688).

For more information on this topic, and to find out how the state should operate and how its affairs should be run, please see Ahkaam al-Sultaaniyyah by Abu’l-Hasan al-Maawardi al-Shaafa’i and Ahkaam al-Sultaaniyyah by Abu Ya’la al-Farra’ al-Hanbali, and al-Tarteeb al-Idaariyyah by al-Kattaani.

TL;DR: In order to maintain order inside the caliph, even fighting for power is fair game, as long as as the new ruler rules under Islamic rules.
Makes sense, if you consider that leaders can become decadent, and this "law" regulates that if someone were to overthrow them, this would at least have "positive effects", as the new leader would rule using islamic values again.