Islam and Democracy

[ScimitarXEdge]

I made this thread because of certain iirrational intelectual frauds who out of their internal anguish from feelings of inferiority look for any drive possible to derail a thread to redeem their ignorant and irrational dogma. One such myth they do to perpetuate that is to portray their Ignorance and irrational banter is for The Cause of "The One" i.e. Allah(swt) and create a distorted portrayal that democracy which aims to provide for the well being of the masses violates the will of "The One"

Now about the whole issue of The One.

Following the will of The One is great if that One is Allah(swt); but the problem is, we don't at this time have a direct ink to "The ne" to know what his will is since Nabi(saw) is no longer here. What we have left is the sources Nabi(saw) left behind; which is being sieved through for us by poorly educated ignorant individuals who are blind to the problems of the world. In that instance following the will of the "The One" becomes the blind leading the blind. WHy should one man's will rule over everyone else, especially when that ONE man neither knows the will of "The One - Allah(swt)" nor anything else.

here is the definition of Democracy.

de·moc·ra·cy   [dih-mok-ruh-see] Show IPA
noun, plural -cies.
1.
government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
2.
a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies.
3.
a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.
4.
political or social equality; democratic spirit.
5.
the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to

If we can observe here; the ILL educated and ignorant, who usually work menial Jobs and exist purely by ignorance and blind dogma and irrationality will think the common mistake that Democracy means "rule of the majority"

Democracy has several definitions; one is Supreme Rule by the people; but another is where people are EQUAL in decision making and power, but not necessarily supreme rule.

the Qu'ran says
"Those who hearken to their Lord, and establish regular Prayer; who (conduct) their affairs by mutual consultation among themselves; who spend out of what We bestow on them for Sustenance" [are praised]"

In the same sentence it says "hearken to their Lord" and "conduct their affairs by mutual consultation". There seems to be no conflict Qur'anically speaking with The Will of God and the Will of Humans, as long as the prior is accepted as their foundation.

Based on the definitions of democracy, the sentence in the Qur'an may contradict Definition one, which has the clause of "Supreme Power"; but it seems wholly compatible with Definitions 2 and 3.

While "The One-Allah(swt)"'s will maybe the basis for Governent, how we understand THAT will becomes something we must Discover by consulting about it in respects to what tools we have. There's no explicitly defined clase in The One's Will which tells us How to organize a Healthcare plan for every citizen, or How much should be spent on Education vs MIlitary, or What sort of causes and ordinances are needed for Environmental Protection; these are things which are decided by the needs of the masses, because these things are variable based on the conditions of the masses.

It's ironic that the individuals who claim democracy is an attempt of imposing western thought disguised as Islam, are in actuality brainwashed by Western society and their perverse distortion of history to think that things which are actually Islamic are western. In their mind Science is western, evolution is western, knowledge is western, prosperity is western, good heath is western, fairness is western, justice is western, human dignity is western, morality is western. being against corruption is western, decency is western,logic is western, rationality is western. If all this is "western" to people who think like this. what then would be Islamic for them? The only rational conclusion would be ignorance, irrationality, injustice and decay. Indeed Islam came to liberate and promote humanity so things like logic, justice , rationality, knowledge, that are portrayed as some sort of Western scheme is really a tactic to handicap and keep Muslims subjugated.

MOst of the opponents of an Islamic Democracy, who pose as if they're concerned about the purity of God's Laws and languish over democracy it as some sort of travesty against the Sovereignty and WIll of God ....pay no respects to God's Laws themselves; like total hypocrites.

Some of them makes profit by harram means, selling and consuming pork; and on top of even the beef and chicken they sell is slaughtered in vile and heinous ways. Animals tortured, pumped with hormones and other sick things which violate the Will of God, profiting from the suffering caused to animals that God mandates to end. Some others are self admitted drug users who STILL openly engage in the use of drugs like Marijuana, which Nabi(saw) remarked "even a little bit is an intoxicant(khamr)"; and lso stated that one who uses KHAMR, is not a Believer while they use it.

Yet these people feel no shame or remorse for their actions, it is all acceptable to them, unless of course their contradictions are openly exposed, then they'll make absurd claims like saying they "sold their fast food business" or "just stopped using drugs". Which seems all too convenient that it happened when scrutiny started coming their way.

On one hand they'll say democracy is Western and Logic and Rationality is the product of the corrupt Greek Philosophers, and people who use Philosophy are "heretics" but turn around and MISquote Socrates and Plato and claim that the Philosopher Kings are Khilafah. If anyone knows the History of the Khilafah, a Khalif was neither a King nor a Philospher. Imam Umar Ibn Khattab(ra) once remarked to woman who was complaining to Umar about the shortages of grain and said "I am not a ruler , but a servant of God, and I serve God by serving the needs of his Nation". that sounds a lot like democracy to me, it certainly doesn't sound like a King or a Philosopher to me Kings are absolute authorities who's subjects serve them, and Philosophers, while meritable, are merely striving to ascertain truths, but have no direct platform for decisions, just introspective ideas. How ironic that these people who are so vehement against the West are yet trying to claim greek philosophy is analagous to Islam.

[faye]

a lot of knowledge was pre islam that you seem to claim as islamic. christian syrics translated greek knowledge into arabic which was then analysed and or improved upon and the iranians had universities already. even ibn sina learned some indian maths and studied 'metaphysics' of aristotle, which could have influenced his delving deeper into the origins of creation.
it doesn't appear that the arabs themselves, already had a lot going for them, pre islam, which then organised and united them.
the american 'democratic' system was also influenced by the native indians, who were then swept under the rug.

[Bengal_Tiger]

a lot of knowledge was pre islam that you seem to claim as islamic. christian syrics translated greek knowledge into arabic which was then analysed and or improved upon and the iranians had universities already. even ibn sina learned some indian maths and studied 'metaphysics' of aristotle, which could have influenced his delving deeper into the origins of creation.
it doesn't appear that the arabs themselves, already had a lot going for them, pre islam, which then organised and united them.
the american 'democratic' system was also influenced by the native indians, who were then swept under the rug.

The pre-Islamic period of central Arabia is known as "Ayyam al Jahiliya" (days of ignorance). Islamic historians write that the pre-Islamic Arabs were rooted in ignorance and backwardness. The Byzantine and Sassanid (Iranian) Empires were far more advanced and did not even conquer Arabia because they considered it a waste of time, meaningless as it had nothing to offer.

Islamic history writes that the early Muslims took things from the Persians including administrative systems, which did not conflict with Islam (e.g. despotic monarchy), and other things. One example is that the Arabs were not aware of a trench for warfare and it was the companion of the prophet Salman the Persian who advised the Muslims to make a trench when they were being besieged by a huge army of pagan Arabs.

Arabs of Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Yemen however were far more advanced and so were other Semites, the main reason is probably the geographical factors, access to water and irrigation gives a stable source of food which then allows a culture to transcend beyond mere survival and focus on other things. Central Arabia was/is barren and produced a nomadic lifestyle.

However the Central Arabs were masters of poetry and the ancient Arabs of that time could speak Arabic with outstanding eloquence, since in the absence of other forms of culture, poetry thrived. The Quran was revealed during the peak of Arab eloquence and poetic attainment and coud not be surpassed.

[Alchemist]

In his own definition list Democracy is given the meaning of rule by Majority, since the examples of Canadian and American government are those run by rule of majority. Then he says that only irrational believe it to be so?
Is this guy on crack or just high off himself?
The definition says equality of "people"...regardless of religious affiliation but in the Islamic Ummah the disbelievers do not have a say in the affairs of the Ummah. They pay the Jizyah, a tax levied against them for not converting to Islam.

Everyone knows that the idealized form of democracy was practiced by the Athenians. Every citizen was given a piece of rock which symbolized their voting power and every issued was debated before the public for a decision. When after the Holy Prophet peace be upon passed away did hundreds or thousands of muslims participate in such a voting system? Not until a century prior when the Islamic khilafah was abolished by western powers. So logically, democracy was spoon fed to the Ummah.

Have no delusions here. Even Pharouh held shuras, and he considered himself a god. A shura is similar to a meeting of board members at a big firm. Decisions are weight upon by those who ranked higher...after the time of Prophet peace be upon him, the ones that were closest to him would consult each other. However, on the major decisions the absence of the parties who were of concern lead to great disunity in the Ummah...such as the meeting at Saqifah at which Ali karimallahu wajhu was not present. Umar ibn khattab radiallahu anhu only held shuras when he felt he needed but in most cases he did what he saw best fit...his plans to attack, who to appoint leadership in different campaigns, governors and judges, and establishing tarawih prayer or collection of quran or nominees for next khilafah.
The style of governance where every single member of the Ummah would have to weigh on leadership was unheard of...everyone is equal, but only by virtue do they excel one another.

And this monkey, ****mitar, feels that ulama of deen are too ignorant to know what the command of Allah is because he thinks that the link between us and Allah has been severed by the demise of the Prophet peace be upon him. The one believes such a nonsensical statement is the real hypocrite. He suffers from the anguish of an inferiority complex so he peddles unislamic values and beliefs to us, slavishly. The truth is that 100% of the Islamic Ummah today does not act upon the command of Allah, which is dictated in a timeless book. If we did then we wouldn't be the oppressed and we wouldn't be trying to islamize and rationalize western dogmas.
Like it or not, the khalifa rules in such a weigh, where his hukm is literally the hukm of Allah. By definition the Khalifa conducts the Power of Allah on Earth. If war is declared by him, then every able body must hasten to the front line. Because disobedience to the khalifa is disobedience to Allah. You cannot make the excuse that the link between Allah and the Ummah does not exist so we don't know His hukm is...so we don't have to follow the Khalifa because he too doesn't know. Anyone makes this type of argument simply does not believe that the Qu'ran is the word of Allah.


Of what this pretentious monkey has typed, 3/4th of is just slander which makes it clear who is really in anguish here.

The way he puts a spin on the ayats of Qur'an is no different than how a qadiani does. This is owing to the belief that they think Ulama of deen are ignorant and that they must adopt the western attitude that their own whims are rational and superior to the rest.

He will continue with his nonsensical banter and try to discredit me as usual but I won't...his argument holds no water....let this monkey type what he wills because his own job and life are menial and allows him that luxury. I have better things to do...


Salam

[ScimitarXEdge]

UQu

What a surprise; the response of the Hypocrites who have been brainwashed by the Western Imperialist indoctrination that the virtues of Islam really belong to the Western world to steer Muslims into ignorance and dysfunctionality. The "pharoah used to hold shuras" is really another form f the "hitler was a vegetarian so vegetarianism is wrong". Imagine if someone said that "Qur'an advocates shura, so the Qur'an was copyig the Pharoah". That's how absurd their arguments are. The arguments here are completely intellectually dishonest; The use of Shura was emphasized and employed during the lifetime of Nabi(saw)

here are numerous examples.

Tirmidhi-Sharif "Aisha (ra) narrated, "I have not seen any one consult in matters more than Nabi (saw)

Tabari narrates "Nabi(saw) was commanded to consult so he can provide an example for Muslims to follow and make him a model and follow his model"

Numerous examples of Shura was applied in Nabi(saw)'s life to name a couple.

he held Shura during the battle of Azhab to have treaty with Bani Gutfan where the Ansar disagreed

He held a Shura regaridng the appointment of Mu'adh Ibn Jabal (ra) to be Governor of Yemen.

and these are only two examples of over a dozen. Imagine if someone argued "Alchemist sells pork and harram meat so Islam must be full of hypocrisy"; how absurd that would beThe munafiqs try to portray that democracy was spoon fed to the Ummah by the west, when the opposite was true. Where is the democracy in Saudi arabia , Kuwait, Iraq under Saddam, Egypt under Nationalists, or even Afghanistan and Pakistan all of whom were states created by the Imperialist hordes who left their institutions of subjugation in place and were created after the Khilafah was deposed. The Irony of the trying to say Democracy was spoon fed to Muslims, when the despots of the Middle East are all western backed and supported. The Western scapegoat blows up in their faces just like the fraudulent banner for standing for "the Will of God".

Now if Nabi(saw) held shura with the Ansar in which they can agree, we can guaratee that the Khulafa Rashideen followed the same example. The rhetoric that "Umar Ibn Khattab(ra) held shuras when he felt like it" , if Nabi(saw) was "commanded" to hold shura, who would a Khalifa be to hold a shura "when they felt like it" when they're supposed to follow the model of Nabi(saw).

The factual, logical and evidential basis of the Munfiqs who sell Pork and Shun the Will of Allah(swt); is null and void; they merely spew forth fabrications casually In truth their arguments arent for the defense of Islam or for the Khilafah of Islam, but to secure the power of despots unquestioningly; that Autocracy under the pretense of Religion, exploiting and perverting Islam, is what they favor without any threat of being deposed or challenged by imposing the Emotional Blackmail of Guilt on the masses; except such a strategy totally opposes Islam.

Al-Tabrani narrate that "Ali(ra) asked Nabi(saw), Oh Nabi(saw) if I have a matter for which we do not have a command or prohibition, then what is your advice? Nabi (saw) replied "consult your WISE and RIGHTEOUS, do NOT rely on individual opinion".

A Despotic ruler as Munafiqs who sell pork and do drugs and shun the Will of Allah(swt) themselves while accusing others of doing so; is the exact opposite of this.They've created a Straw Man promoting democracy in Islam is trying to sway Islamic Laws to emulate the patterns and mores of western ; where Gays can marry, people can buy liquor; even though ironically these people indulge in the Western ways of drug abuse and Pork consumption, all things western democracy promotes, Advocates of Islamic Democracy do not promote anything of the sort. The Democracy of Islam would have Islamic Shari'ah as the foundational point of Law and their application to relevant issues s conferred upon by the Muslims.

The shallow idea of equality of members in a democratic system is not merely a free for all for everyone to promote whatever agenda regardless of merit. As stated by Nabi(saw) it is consultation of the WISE and Righteous; equality comes in that everyone has an EQUAL chance to demonstrate their merits and not controlled by an oligarchy of self proclaimed Elite, Equality means everyone has a fair chance to show their merit; not that everything happens regardless of merit. Islamic Democracy is a meritocracy contrary to what the corrupt hypocrites are trying to convey There is no animosity with Ulama; the animosity is against with the ignorant who label themselves Ulama and merely ake judgements on things without even cursory knowledge of subjects they pronounce upon. The advocation here is against the incompetent; what Islam promotes is COMPETENT Ulama, those who have knowledge of ALL relevant subjects. Not people who shun knowledge because it challenges their dogmas.

If we had individuals like Mustafa (Alchemist) ruling over us; we'x have children dying of easily curable diseases and women dying in childbirth; ......oh wait we already do.

[faye]

now we have children dying of diseases created by scientists.
'so called' democracies are being manipulated by the rich industrialists and big banks, everywhere.

[graveyardofempires]

my opinion apart
lets see what is opinion of Afghans

[ScimitarXEdge]

my opinion apart
lets see what is opinion of Afghans

Islam IS democracy

THIS is not Islam

Do you support, Taliban beating women? Answer Yes or No - YouTube

[ScimitarXEdge]

now we have children dying of diseases created by scientists.
'so called' democracies are being manipulated by the rich industrialists and big banks, everywhere.

Islamic democracy is the solution

would you rather have a dictatorship?

[faye]

islamic democracy for muslims? sure, go for it. yeah, right, i would just love to live under a dictatorship, scimitar, with you as the big boss man :-)
i was pointing out the failing of the western 'democracies' as now being manipulated.

[retro]

now we have children dying of diseases created by scientists.
'so called' democracies are being manipulated by the rich industrialists and big banks, everywhere.

Whilst it's fair to associate social inequality and mercantilism with Western democracies. Governments have always been overtly manipulated and controled by the rich.

[faye]

social inequality has been in many civilisations, retro.

[Alchemist]

****mitar, you just repeated your own argument so I ll have to do the same or else you'll fool your self into thinking that you "won".

Islamic democracy is an oxymoron.

Islam means submission to the Will of Allah.
Democracy means submission to the Will of the People.

Even though you admit that the consultation of the Prophet peace be upon was only with the Righteous and those closes to him..in small gatherings...you still wish to validate the democratic process of the west.

If Democracy is Islam, then logically, America and Canada are Islamic.

Your analogy of hitler is unfounded and irrelevant. If the prophet consulted, and the pharoh consulted, it doesn't mean they were being democratic...that was the point ...you jack ass. The value that you are trying to ascribe to democracy is non existent in Islam.

Did the holy prophet peace be upon have women present during his consultation? Well, in a truly democratic country, women must be given the choice to vote and run for office...hence "equal opportunity"...gays must have rights too..even if you think what they are doing is wrong, or that they are incapable to do so...you should admit them the right because you consider them your equal.

Ah, but there is the trick son. How do you know who is in the right and who isn't?
Who decides that? You?
Then what's the point of having a democracy if you are the one picking and choosing who ought to participate and who doesn't?

Let's face it ****mitar....logic isn't really your forte.


You say that democracy is necessary because Qur'an doesn't have the answer as to how we should structure health care system and how much to spend on standing armies?

Well, the alim can tell you that those questions have nothing to do with democracy ...but with bureaucracy. During the high times of Baghdad there were already licensing systems for practising doctors and a medical profession on par with modern medical institutions. Standing armies? The prophet peace be upon him said "My sustenance comes from under the shade of lance". Muslims didn't have "standing armies"...that is why the european still fear us so much when we had conquered half of europe and had the whole world in panic. The answers are all there in the Qur'an. You don't need a democracy to figure it all out.
Like I said, jack ass, in any big corporation, the members of the board weigh in on decisions...not every single employee in the company votes on every issue..or any issue! The consultation that members of the board have with each other does not equate to a democracy - equal participation of all, and implemination of the will of the majority.
Besides, Allah ta3alla says "If you obey the majority of people on earth, they will divert you from the path of God. They follow only conjecture; they only guess". How many times in the Qur'an does Allah say that majority of the people have gone astray?

What does saddam or hussni mubarak have to do with democracy? What happened before or after them? better or worse? You follow nothing but conjectures son...

and just stop with the pork and marijuana obsession ...its really pitiful of you to stoop so low. I feel sorry for u.

[ScimitarXEdge]

de·moc·ra·cy   [dih-mok-ruh-see] Show IPA
noun, plural -cies.
1.
government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
2.
a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies.
3.
a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.
4.
political or social equality; democratic spirit.
5.
the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.

I see no reference or mention of the expression "submission" here in fact in none of the variants seem to implicate submission to people, but governed by the people. Islam does not in anyway imply direct Governance by God, God leaves his guidelines and ordinances which the People, by the Laws that were instituted in doctrine and in Natural Law, apply and regulate over. Since people are the administrators of Islam, and they embody and carry out the ordinances of Islam, this too is Government by people.

All hypocrites like yourself are doing is playing around with umbrella phrases like "Will of God" and "Submission to God"; to create some false dichotomy that they mean mutually exclusive things than governing people.

The fact that Islam has a mimimum requirement for eligibility in decision making is not a contradiction with democracy.

Similarly in America and Canada there are requirements for being able to vote, being a competent adult, who is able bodied in mind and capable of making independent decisions is a requisite. This is why .mentally challenged people, like yourself, are barred from voting

and you say logic is NOT my forte' .....your clear misunderstanding of what denotes democracy entails is the epitome of logical failure.

Bureacracy in according to the dictionary is

the body of officials and administrators, especially of a government or government department.

it only refers to the machinery which perform the functions of governing ordinances, their decisions are ratified by people who vote, hence decision of healthcare and how much to spend are decided by the people, not the bureacracy

My last post was to call you out and expose how your understanding of the sunnah and how Muhammad(saw) dealt with shura was totally incorrect and thus your understanding of the methods of the Khulafa Rashideen would simiilarly be incorrect since they administered his methods.

If there was repeated material there in it was only to reinforce how bogus your claim is and how the sunnah and khulafa rashideen confirm democratic processes.

It is only your corrupt despots who hijaack the term "Ulama" to justify their corruption and ignorance who reject democracy

You're the follower of man-made corruption, not Islam

So Islam is only an oxymoron to your ignorant understandings of things, not Democracy

as for Islam and women, women used petition and hold shuras with Nabi(saw) regarding the behaviors of their males ......and he made ordinances in regards to it ....so clearly Islam does recognize female partcipation in social and political affairs such as voting.

[Alchemist]

now who is playing the semantic's game?

You've shot gunned a some phrases that you assume are driven from divine law but are not.

The truth is that you are a Naturalistic Pantheist.
Therefore you believe that whatever "the people" do is "naturally" the right thing, since nature is the divine dictation of the Will of Allah.
However, the ploy of shaitan does not factor into your assumption nor the people's propensity to err and disobey the Will of Allah.
Hence, for you the will of the people is the will of Allah, and so you do not see a dichotomy. Just like how do not see a dichotomy between the Creator and His creation. You have difficulty in believing in Heaven and Hell as places existing in themselves, realer than what we perceive of this dunya, which is why you do not believe "literally" in the the existence of Adam and Hawa, alihima salam.

You fail to realize that some of the most successful societies in history were monorchial. For example, Frederick the Great. It certainly wasn't a "democracy" but had an effective bureaucracy.
Likewise I gave you the example of Baghdad, the affairs of which were also run by dynasties....not "democracies".

"man-made" law is what you are trying peddle here son.
What you are doing here is exactly how a "democracy" works ...you come here and debate on some issue and hope not to enlighten anyone, me or your self but only to sway public opinion which is why your whole argument has only been "You are ignorant...yatty yatty ya". The way politicians in the west try to run smear campaigns against their opponents...because the public does not get swayed by persuasive arguments but by heuristic cues...which is why the campaigners for Obama won a prestigious Advertisement Award...beating the likes of nike, coka cola etc. Which is exactly why your arguments so far have been emotional and superficial. Honestly ....starting a post with a dictionary definition? LOL

Speaking of man made laws...and how corrupt they are...an example of how Qur'an does not give any type of restriction on who allegedly can "vote"...what age would you call to restriction then? 18? Explain why... and would you vote for a female leader? And explain why not ...
Try to convince me that democracy is in the interest of the Ummah instead of assuming that it just is. Humour me