Democracy is major shirk

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

PWNED


Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani was one of the scholars who opposed the idea of Pakistan. He was also Shaiykhul-Hadees (Chief of Faculty) of Darul Uloom Deoband and led the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, an organization of the 'Ulama, that saw nothing Islamic in the idea of Pakistan. He said: "All should endeavour jointly for such a democratic government in which Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and Parsis are included. Such a freedom is in accordance with Islam."

Do you agree with his understanding of democracy as such: All should endeavour jointly for such a democratic government in which Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and Parsis are included[B]. Such a freedom is in accordance with Islam.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Ahem what are these alleged Ayat that deal with the other "conditions" please educate and enlighten us.

You are saying that Shura and democracy is the same, right?

Shura has its conditions. Those are the verses in Quran stipulating the requirements of an Islamic shura.

Since you are claiming to know what an Islamic shura is, you should know what those conditions are.

If you don't know the conditions, how can you claim that Shura is the same as democracy?

And no I am not going to post those conditions here. You and Khushal are saying that a Shura is the same as democracy, so the burden of proof is upon you. You must provide us a shar'i demarcation of Shura so that we can see that your claim is indeed based on Quran and Sunnah and not merely your whims and desires.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

I am guessing that when approached by the words of a scholar which he doesn't agree with, he will say that this man or others aren't real scholars or muslims, this is a typical salafi tactic. Its strange that in the current days of "too many chiefs, not enough indians" in that scholarship is almost a dime a dozen, he holds the title of "scholar" with such high esteem like the shias he hates and their imams, despite the fact that even great scholars disagree with each other.

Instead of guessing what I am going to say, why don't you log off and visit your local mosque and sit with the pupils and learn how to read and write?

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Request for the democrats of PF:

Please provide a concise definition of democracy in not more than 500 words on which you all can agree on.

For the purpose of clear understanding and avoidance of communication, let us define democracy first before we continue with this discussion.

I have the standard textbook definitions of democracy from several American and European political scientists. I won't post those because the democrats on PF claim that I don't know anything about democracy. So I will allow you, democrats to teach me what democracy is. For this I require from you to come up with a clear definition you all agree on.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

[MENTION=4934]RevolutionThroughReason[/MENTION],

Would you please be so kind to explain why Maulana Hasan Madani was against the two-state solution in the subcontinent and how this relates to his stance towards democracy and a pluralist democratic society? Please, provide more text from Madani regarding his views on democracy. I am curious to know about his views.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Question
as you know, here in pakistan, maulana sufi muhammad has lead the fight to bring the sharia to at least a part of pakistan. however he has made a statement that most ulama here especially in karachi feel he should not have made and they say it is his personal opinion and not a fatwa.
sufi muhammad said that the system of democracy, the court system and the entire democratic system is kufr. and people like altaf hussain of the mqm movement are kafir for opposing the implementation of sharia in swat.
what does the sharia say about this matter. sufi saahib quotes the quran sura al-maaida in which refers to those that rule according to a law other than the sharia of Allah as kafiroon.
what is the correct opinion about this matter?

Answer

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatuh

There are two issues in your query:

• 1. The democratic system being Kufr.
• 2. Opposing the implementation of Shari’a in Swat.

1. It is true that the democratic system is un-Islamic. Islam only recognises a ‘Shari’a system’, that is a system governed by the Qurān and Hadīth. Any system other than a ‘Shari’a system’ is un-Islamic and should not be supported by Muslims.

‘Democracy” is derived from the Greek word “dēmokratia” (“Dēmos” meaning people and “Kratos” meaning rule or strength). It is evident that in a democratic state, citizens are at liberty to voice their opinions and actively participate in decision-making and other state related issues. This has lured many Muslims to believe a democratic system to be a fair, just and equitable system. Convincing as it may seem, the truth is that a democratic system is un-Islāmic.

One of the primary flaws in a democratic system is that ‘majority view’ is accepted. This is irrespective of whether the ‘majority view’ conforms to Shari’a or not. In an Islāmic system, views that conform to Shari’a are accepted and views against Shari’a are rejected, though it may be the ‘majority view’. This flaw could be deduced from the following verse.

Allāh Ta’ala states in the Qurān:

وَإِنْ تُطِعْ أَكْثَرَ مَنْ فِي الْأَرْضِ يُضِلُّوكَ عَنْ سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ

“If you obey the majority of those on earth, they will make you lose the way of Allah”. [6:116]

Furthermore, if one analyses the structure of a democratic system, one can conclude it is simply ‘people ruling themselves by themselves’. As Muslims, we firmly believe that our lives are governed by the laws of Shari’a (Qurān and Hadīth) and not by laws that people invent by themselves for themselves.

Allāh Ta’ala states in the Qurān:

فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّى يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا

“So, never by your Lord! Never shall they become believers, unless they make you (Muhammad –Sallallāhu alayhi wa sallam) the judge in the disputes that arise between them, then find no discomfort in their hearts against what you have decided, and surrender to it in total submission”. [4:65]

Legislation is the right of Allāh Ta’ala. Man is bound to the legislation of Allāh Ta’ala. The democratic system has taken the right of legislation from Allāh Ta’ala and given it to man, whereby man has the power to invent laws to suite himself. This is purely un-Islāmic. Supporting democracy is tantamount to supporting the laws invented by man and abandoning the laws of Allāh Ta’ala. Allāh Ta’ala strongly condemns such action and has labelled its perpetrators as Fāsiqūn (transgressors) and in another verse as Zālimūn (oppressors).

Allāh Ta’ala states in the Qurān:

وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ
“And those that not rule by that which Allāh has revealed are surely the transgressors”. [5:47]

وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ
“And those that not rule by that which Allāh has revealed are surely the oppressors”. [5:47]

Shah Waliyullāh has also rejected the concept of ‘democracy’ in his book titled Hujjatullāh Al-Bāligah. You may refer to it for your study. (vol 1, pg 135, Qadeemi, Chapter On Administrating a City)

We do not intend discussing democracy from a secular point of view. However, just as a thought, apart from Islām not recognising a democratic system, many non-Muslims have also criticized this system. Some have mention that voters are not well educated enough to exercise their democratic right. A population with low intellect would probably not be capable in making correct decisions. Since the time of Milton Friedman, economists have strongly criticized the efficiency of democracy.

It is also important to explain the position of voting in a democratic state. The democratic system is un-Islāmic. However, it will be permissible to vote within such a system.

As Muslims, our object of voting within a democratic system is not to promote its values and un-Islāmic teachings. Rather, it is to use the mechanism of democracy to promote our own values, as democracy allows freedom of religion. Muslims minorities in non-Muslim countries should live in harmony with their fellow citizens and use the democratic machinery in the most efficient way to advance their cause just as anyone else will do so in a democratic system.

When a person casts a vote, he is effectively offering his opinion in favour of a candidate to represent the nation. If there is a pious and upright Muslim candidate, he should be voted for, as he will seek the best interest of Islām and the Muslims.

At times, it may happen that there exists no Muslim candidate; however, there are candidates that could cause great harm to Islām and others who, despite not benefiting Islām, will not cause harm to Islām.

In such situation, it would be advisable to vote the candidate that will not cause harm to Islām, despite him not benefitting Islām. As Muslims, we will not be liable for the wrongs of this candidate, as the main intention of electing him into position was for the sake of safeguarding Islām and the Muslims from a greater evil.

2. The second issue is opposing the implementation of Shari’a law in Swat. In answering this question, it is essential to understand the history and background to the establishment of Pakistan.

After the liberation of India, the Muslims felt that they should establish a completely independent country, whereby they could institute Islāmic rule and Shari’. In this regard, the Muslim League Party travelled the length and breadth of India campaigning for people to support their course. By the plan of Allāh Ta’ala and the untold assistance of the Ulāma, the likes of Mawlāna Thānwi, Mawlāna Zafar Ahmad Uthmāni, Mawlāna Shabbīr Ahmad Uthmāni and others, Pakistan was granted to the Muslims.
At that time, Liaqat Ali Khan was the leader of the Muslim League Party. He had sought the assistance of the Ulamā. The Ulamā acceded to this proposal of his, provided he gave them a guarantee that the constitution of Pakistan will be based on Islāmic values and principles. Liaqat Ali Khan responded by saying that Pakistan would obviously have an Islāmic constitution, as majority of its citizens would be Muslims.
It is evident from the above that Pakistan was established solely for the institution of Islāmic rule and values. Why must Shari’a and Islāmic rule not be established in Pakistan, when this was the very reason for which Pakistan was established?
Moreover, majority of Pakistan’s citizens are Muslims. Thus, it demands that they should be implementing Islāmic rule. Why should Islāmic rule be opposed in a country that has majority Muslims? Yes, if majority citizens are non-Muslims, then the implementation of Islāmic rule is a different issue.

And Allah knows best
Wassalamu Alaikum
Ml. Talha Desai,
Student Darul Iftaa
Checked and Approved by:
Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah

[RevolutionThroughReason]

You are saying that Shura and democracy is the same, right?

Shura has its conditions. Those are the verses in Quran stipulating the requirements of an Islamic shura.

Since you are claiming to know what an Islamic shura is, you should know what those conditions are.

If you don't know the conditions, how can you claim that Shura is the same as democracy?

And no I am not going to post those conditions here. You and Khushal are saying that a Shura is the same as democracy, so the burden of proof is upon you. You must provide us a shar'i demarcation of Shura so that we can see that your claim is indeed based on Quran and Sunnah and not merely your whims and desires.

LOL ....I see what you're doing. I Show you an Ayat, and you're backed in the corner so now to make it seem like you weren't refuted, you're trying to talk a lot of fluff and make it seem like you were right when in reality you're blindly following a bunch of uneducated Saudis.;

Well done.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

LOL ....I see what you're doing. I Show you an Ayat, and you're backed in the corner so now to make it seem like you weren't refuted, you're trying to talk a lot of fluff and make it seem like you were right when in reality you're blindly following a bunch of uneducated Saudis.;

Well done.

spare me the commentary, just stick to the debate. Answer my queries.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Do you agree with his understanding of democracy as such: All should endeavour jointly for such a democratic government in which Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and Parsis are included[B]. Such a freedom is in accordance with Islam.

That's not the point; you asked if there are Deobandi scholars that embrace that say democracy is compatible with Islam.

Don't change goal posts.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

spare me the commentary, just stick to the debate. Answer my queries.

I already did,. just because you don't like my other answers doesn't mean you can trail off into a bunch of other tangent questions after I sufficed your questions.



Now please explain which verses democrate the proper conditions of Shura, because as far as I'm aware the verse I posted is all we have on the Qur2an.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Since you are claiming to know what an Islamic shura is, you should know what those conditions are.
.

But you just said I was wrong and that I exposed myself as ignorant; so now you have to show the correct answer after you made a counter claim.

I did my part. Now you're just dancing around.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

But you just said I was wrong and that I exposed myself as ignorant; so now you have to show the correct answer after you made a counter claim.

I did my part. Now you're just dancing around.

Am I right to say you have no knowledge of the shar'i conditions for a shura other than the verse you posted?

Rtr, this is not a game.

I made the thread with aqwaal of different scholars saying democracy is un-Islamic.

You said the scholars are wrong and you said that shura is democracy.

Now we both agree about Shura being a legislated matter in Islam. The articles of Islamic law stipulate the conditions of this particular matter.

So you must know those articles very well, even better than the Indian, Egyptian, Saudi, Syrian, Jordanian, Albanian and Yemeni scholars.

This is why I expect from you to be more elaborate in your response.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

That's not the point; you asked if there are Deobandi scholars that embrace that say democracy is compatible with Islam.

Don't change goal posts.

You are taking the statement of Madani out of context. You must provide a more comprehensive text from Madani.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Request for the democrats of PF:

Please provide a concise definition of democracy in not more than 500 words on which you all can agree on.

For the purpose of clear understanding and avoidance of communication, let us define democracy first before we continue with this discussion.

I have the standard textbook definitions of democracy from several American and European political scientists. I won't post those because the democrats on PF claim that I don't know anything about democracy. So I will allow you, democrats to teach me what democracy is. For this I require from you to come up with a clear definition you all agree on.

[MENTION=4934]RevolutionThroughReason[/MENTION] [MENTION=1547]khushal[/MENTION]

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Am I right to say you have no knowledge of the shar'i conditions for a shura other than the verse you posted?

Rtr, this is not a game.

I made the thread with aqwaal of different scholars saying democracy is un-Islamic.

You said the scholars are wrong and you said that shura is democracy.

Now we both agree about Shura being a legislated matter in Islam. The articles of Islamic law stipulate the conditions of this particular matter.

So you must know those articles very well, even better than the Indian, Egyptian, Saudi, Syrian, Jordanian, Albanian and Yemeni scholars.

This is why I expect from you to be more elaborate in your response.

If it's not a game why do you keep dancing around presenting all the alleged criterion according to the Shari'ah

Speaking on my own behalf, I'm just waiting on you.